A comparison of HIV‐1 drug susceptibility as provided by conventional phenotyping and by a phenotype prediction tool based on viral genotype

Concordance between the conventional HIV‐1 phenotypic drug resistance assay, PhenoSense™ (PS), and virco®TYPE HIV‐1 (vT), a drug resistance assay based on prediction of the phenotype, was investigated in a data set from the Stanford HIV Resistance database (hivdb). Depending on the drug, between 287 and 902 genotype–phenotype data pairs were available for comparisons. Test results (fold‐change values) in the two assays were highly correlated, with an overall mean correlation coefficient of 0.90 using single PS measurements. This coefficient rose to 0.94 when the vT results were compared to the mean of repeat PS measurements. These results are comparable with the corresponding correlation coefficients of 0.87 and 0.95, calculated using single measurements, and the mean of repeat measurements, respectively, as obtained in the Antivirogram® assay, the conventional HIV‐1 phenotypic drug resistance test on which vT is based. The proportion of resistance calls resulting in a “major” discordance (fully susceptible or maximal response by one assay but fully resistant or minimal response by the other) ranged from 0% to 8.1% for drugs for which two clinical test cut‐offs were available in both assays (didanosine, abacavir, tenofovir, saquinavir/r, fosamprenavir/r, and lopinavir/r), from 2.4% to 8.1% for the drugs for which two clinical test cut‐offs were available in the vT assay and one clinical test cut‐off in the PS assay (lamivudine, stavudine, indinavir/r, and atazanavir/r) and from 3.1% to 10.3% for drugs for which biological test cut‐offs were used (zidovudine, nevirapine, delavirdine, efavirenz, indinavir, ritonavir, nelfinavir, saquinavir, and fosamprenavir). Our analyses suggest that these assays provide comparable resistance information, which will be of value to physicians who may be presented with either or both types of test report in their practice. J. Med. Virol. 81:1702–1709, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.