Advantages of predicted phenotypes and statistical learning models in inferring virological response to antiretroviral therapy from HIV genotype

Background Inferring response to antiretroviral therapy from the viral genotype alone is challenging. The utility of an intermediate step of predicting in vitro drug susceptibility is currently controversial. Here, we provide a retrospective comparison of approaches using either genotype or predicted phenotypes alone, or in combination. Methods Treatment change episodes were extracted from two large databases from the USA (Stanford-California) and Europe (EuResistDB) comprising data from 6,706 and 13,811 patients, respectively. Response to antiretroviral treatment was dichotomized according to two definitions. Using the viral sequence and the treatment regimen as input, three expert algorithms (ANRS, Rega and HIVdb) were used to generate genotype-based encodings and VircoTYPE™ 4.0 (Virco BVBA, Mechelen, Belgium) was used to generate a predicted phenotype-based encoding. Single drug classifications were combined into a treatment score via simple summation and statistical learning using random forests. Classification performance was studied on Stanford- California data using cross-validation and, in addition, on the independent EuResistDB data. Results In all experiments, predicted phenotype was among the most sensitive approaches. Combining single drug classifications by statistical learning was significantly superior to unweighted summation (P<2.2x10-16). Classification performance could be increased further by combining predicted phenotypes and expert encodings but not by combinations of expert encodings alone. These results were confirmed on an independent test set comprising data solely from EuResistDB. Conclusions This study demonstrates consistent performance advantages in utilizing predicted phenotype in most scenarios over methods based on genotype alone in inferring virological response. Moreover, all approaches under study benefit significantly from statistical learning for merging single drug classifications into treatment scores.

[1]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Estimating HIV evolutionary pathways and the genetic barrier to drug resistance. , 2005, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[2]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[3]  D. Katzenstein,et al.  Weighted phenotypic susceptibility scores are predictive of the HIV-1 RNA response in protease inhibitor-experienced HIV-1-infected subjects. , 2004, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[4]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  ROCR: visualizing classifier performance in R , 2005, Bioinform..

[5]  N. Beerenwinkel Computational analysis of HIV drug resistance data , 2004 .

[6]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Improved Prediction of Response to Antiretroviral Combination Therapy using the Genetic Barrier to Drug Resistance , 2006, Antiviral therapy.

[7]  Victor DeGruttola,et al.  Clinically Validated Genotype Analysis: Guiding Principles and Statistical Concerns , 2004, Antiviral therapy.

[8]  Giovanni Ulivi,et al.  Common Law applied to Treatment Decisions for Drug Resistant HIV , 2005 .

[9]  A. Vandamme,et al.  A Genotypic Drug Resistance Interpretation Algorithm that Significantly Predicts Therapy Response in HIV-1-Infected Patients , 2001, Antiviral therapy.

[10]  D. Richman,et al.  2022 update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1. , 2022, Topics in antiviral medicine.

[11]  R. Haubrich,et al.  A randomized, prospective study of phenotype susceptibility testing versus standard of care to manage antiretroviral therapy: CCTG 575 , 2005, AIDS.

[12]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Selecting anti-HIV therapies based on a variety of genomic and clinical factors , 2008, ISMB.

[13]  L. Bacheler,et al.  Prediction of HIV-1 drug susceptibility phenotype from the viral genotype using linear regression modeling. , 2007, Journal of virological methods.

[14]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Comparison of Classifier Fusion Methods for Predicting Response to Anti HIV-1 Therapy , 2008, PloS one.

[15]  W. Heneine,et al.  Increased ability for selection of zidovudine resistance in a distinct class of wild-type HIV-1 from drug-naive persons , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  Sorin Draghici,et al.  Predicting HIV drug resistance with neural networks , 2003, Bioinform..

[17]  G. Ulivi,et al.  A fuzzy relational system trained by genetic algorithms and HIV-1 resistance genotypes/virological response data from prospective studies usefully predicts treatment outcomes , 2004 .

[18]  K. Hertogs,et al.  Long-term efficacy of routine access to antiretroviral-resistance testing in HIV type 1-infected patients: results of the clinical efficacy of resistance testing trial. , 2004, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[19]  Wolfgang Huber,et al.  A Compendium to Ensure Computational Reproducibility in High-Dimensional Classification Tasks , 2004, Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology.

[20]  P. Easterbrook,et al.  Antiretroviral resistance in clinical practice , 2001, International journal of STD & AIDS.

[21]  Joachim Büch,et al.  Arevir: A Secure Platform for Designing Personalized Antiretroviral Therapies Against HIV , 2006, DILS.

[22]  Bradley J. Betts,et al.  Human immunodeficiency virus reverse transcriptase and protease sequence database. , 2003, Nucleic acids research.

[23]  S. Hammer,et al.  Determination of Clinically Relevant Cutoffs for HIV-1 Phenotypic Resistance Estimates Through a Combined Analysis of Clinical Trial and Cohort Data , 2008, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[24]  Amalio Telenti,et al.  Update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1: Fall 2005. , 2005, Topics in HIV medicine : a publication of the International AIDS Society, USA.

[25]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  Prediction of HIV-1 Protease Inhibitor Resistance using a Protein–Inhibitor Flexible Docking Approach , 2005, Antiviral therapy.

[26]  P. Ghys,et al.  Global and regional distribution of HIV-1 genetic subtypes and recombinants in 2004 , 2006, AIDS.

[27]  Michael Ames,et al.  A randomized trial assessing the impact of phenotypic resistance testing on antiretroviral therapy , 2002, AIDS.

[28]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Structural Descriptors of gp120 V3 Loop for the Prediction of HIV-1 Coreceptor Usage , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[29]  C. Sabin Database analyses of predictors of resistance , 2006 .

[30]  Deenan Pillay,et al.  Update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1: Fall 2006. , 2006, Topics in HIV medicine : a publication of the International AIDS Society, USA.

[31]  K. Borroto-Esoda,et al.  Low-Level K65R Mutation in HIV-1 Reverse Transcriptase of Treatment-Experienced Patients Exposed to Abacavir or Didanosine , 2007, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[32]  S. Hammer,et al.  The Relation between Baseline HIV Drug Resistance and Response to Antiretroviral Therapy: Re-Analysis of Retrospective and Prospective Studies Using a Standardized Data Analysis Plan , 2000, Antiviral therapy.

[33]  F. Brun-Vézinet,et al.  Benefits of resistance testing , 2006 .

[34]  Kal Ramnarayan,et al.  Structure‐based phenotyping predicts HIV‐1 protease inhibitor resistance , 2003, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[35]  Tom Fawcett,et al.  An introduction to ROC analysis , 2006, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[36]  Brendan Larder,et al.  The Development of Artificial Neural Networks to Predict Virological response to Combination HIV Therapy , 2007, Antiviral therapy.

[37]  Pierre-Marie Girard,et al.  Phenotypic or genotypic resistance testing for choosing antiretroviral therapy after treatment failure: a randomized trial , 2002, AIDS.

[38]  Karen Jackson,et al.  Personalised social care for adults with disabilities: a problematic concept for frontline practice. , 2006, Health & social care in the community.

[39]  Bryan Chan,et al.  Human immunodeficiency virus reverse transcriptase and protease sequence database , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..