1. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
Download icon

Predictors of SIV recrudescence following antiretroviral treatment interruption

  1. Mykola Pinkevych
  2. Christine M Fennessey
  3. Deborah Cromer
  4. Carolyn Reid
  5. Charles M Trubey
  6. Jeffrey D Lifson
  7. Brandon F Keele  Is a corresponding author
  8. Miles P Davenport  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of New South Wales, Australia
  2. Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, United States
Research Article
  • Cited 6
  • Views 639
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2019;8:e49022 doi: 10.7554/eLife.49022

Abstract

There is currently a need for proxy measures of the HIV rebound competent reservoir (RCR) that can predict viral rebound after combined antiretroviral treatment (cART) interruption. In this study, macaques infected with a barcoded SIVmac239 virus received cART beginning between 4- and 27-days post-infection, leading to the establishment of different levels of viral dissemination and persistence. Later treatment initiation led to higher SIV DNA levels maintained during treatment, which was significantly associated with an increased frequency of SIV reactivation and production of progeny capable of causing rebound viremia following treatment interruption. However, a 100-fold increase in SIV DNA in PBMCs was associated with only a 2-fold increase in the frequency of reactivation. These data suggest that the RCR can be established soon after infection, and that a large fraction of persistent viral DNA that accumulates after this time makes relatively little contribution to viral rebound.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Mykola Pinkevych

    Infection Analytics Program, Kirby Institute for Infection and Immunity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Christine M Fennessey

    AIDS and Cancer Virus Program, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Deborah Cromer

    Infection Analytics Program, Kirby Institute for Infection and Immunity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Carolyn Reid

    AIDS and Cancer Virus Program, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Charles M Trubey

    AIDS and Cancer Virus Program, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Jeffrey D Lifson

    AIDS and Cancer Virus Program, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Brandon F Keele

    AIDS and Cancer Virus Program, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, United States
    For correspondence
    keelebf@mail.nih.gov
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Miles P Davenport

    Infection Analytics Program, Kirby Institute for Infection and Immunity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
    For correspondence
    M.Davenport@unsw.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4751-1831

Funding

National Institutes of Health (HHSN261200800001E)

  • Christine M Fennessey
  • Carolyn Reid
  • Charles M Trubey
  • Jeffrey D Lifson
  • Brandon F Keele

National Health and Medical Research Council (1052979)

  • Mykola Pinkevych
  • Deborah Cromer
  • Miles P Davenport

National Health and Medical Research Council (1149990)

  • Mykola Pinkevych
  • Deborah Cromer
  • Miles P Davenport

National Health and Medical Research Council (1080001)

  • Miles P Davenport

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Animals were cared for in accordance with the Association for the Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC) standards in an AAALAC-accredited facility and all procedures were performed according to protocols approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the National Cancer Institute (Assurance #A4149-01). Animal care was provided in accordance with the procedures outlined in the "Guide for Care and Use of Laboratory Animals". Reference numbers associated with the ethical approval are AVP047 and AVP058.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Frank Kirchhoff, Ulm University Medical Center, Germany

Publication history

  1. Received: June 4, 2019
  2. Accepted: October 24, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: October 25, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: December 17, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 639
    Page views
  • 120
    Downloads
  • 6
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

  1. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Epidemiology and Global Health
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Daniel B Larremore et al.
    Research Article

    Establishing how many people have been infected by SARS-CoV-2 remains an urgent priority for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Serological tests that identify past infection can be used to estimate cumulative incidence, but the relative accuracy and robustness of various sampling strategies has been unclear. We developed a flexible framework that integrates uncertainty from test characteristics, sample size, and heterogeneity in seroprevalence across subpopulations to compare estimates from sampling schemes. Using the same framework and making the assumption that seropositivity indicates immune protection, we propagated estimates and uncertainty through dynamical models to assess uncertainty in the epidemiological parameters needed to evaluate public health interventions, and found that sampling schemes informed by demographics and contact networks outperform uniform sampling. The framework can be adapted to optimize serosurvey design given test characteristics and capacity, population demography, sampling strategy, and modeling approach, and can be tailored to support decision-making around introducing or removing interventions.

    1. Epidemiology and Global Health
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Ashish Goyal et al.
    Research Article Updated

    SARS-CoV-2 is difficult to contain because many transmissions occur during pre-symptomatic infection. Unlike influenza, most SARS-CoV-2-infected people do not transmit while a small percentage infect large numbers of people. We designed mathematical models which link observed viral loads with epidemiologic features of each virus, including distribution of transmissions attributed to each infected person and duration between symptom onset in the transmitter and secondarily infected person. We identify that people infected with SARS-CoV-2 or influenza can be highly contagious for less than 1 day, congruent with peak viral load. SARS-CoV-2 super-spreader events occur when an infected person is shedding at a very high viral load and has a high number of exposed contacts. The higher predisposition of SARS-CoV-2 toward super-spreading events cannot be attributed to additional weeks of shedding relative to influenza. Rather, a person infected with SARS-CoV-2 exposes more people within equivalent physical contact networks, likely due to aerosolization.