 |
|
|
| |
CCR5 Tropism Genotype vs Trofile
|
| |
| |
Reported by Jules Levin
18th Intl HIV Drug Resistance Workshop
Ft Myers Fl June 9-12 2009
At the Resistance Workshop CCR5 Tropism genotyping vs Trofile was the subject of discussion and some controversy as new research in genotyping is moving ahead. There were several posters comparing the two types of tropism testing suggesting similar results, and there was this oral talk by Richard Harrigan, link below. He found genotyping and Trofile similar in terms of predicting tropism. If you look at figure 5 you'll see most times genotyping and Trofile agree in their tropism calls but there are some cases where they differ in calling X4 and R5. However, the study reports similar reductions in viral load whether you screen with genotyping or Trofile. Eoin Coakley went to the microphone after Harrigan's presentation to criticize the small numbers in the study and I have reported that, but Harrigan feels confident that genotyping will yield good efficacy, as good as Trofile, and he is planning further studies. Harrigan told me he expects future study findings to support his feelings and said he looked hard in his analysis to find evidence that Trofile is better than bulk sequence at predicting outcomes because that's what he expected to find, but he could not find that evidence. I think we need to look forward to future studies to try to answer these questions better. Jules
HIV Resistance Wksp: Screening for HIV Tropism Using Population-Based V3 Genotypic Analysis: A Retrospective Virological Outcome Analysis Using Stored Plasma Screening Samples From MOTIVATE 1 - (06/15/09)
HIV Resistance Wksp: CCR5 and CCR5 Screening Assays Comparisons: genotype, 454 Ultra-Deep Sequencing and Trofile - (06/15/09)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
