HIV-1 Tropism Determination Using a Phenotypic Env Recombinant Viral Assay Highlights Overestimation of CXCR4-Usage by Genotypic Prediction Algorithms for CRRF01_AE and CRF02_AG
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 8, Issue: 5, Page: e60566
2013
- 34Citations
- 33Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations34
- Citation Indexes33
- 33
- CrossRef28
- Policy Citations1
- 1
- Captures33
- Readers33
- 33
Article Description
Background:Human Immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV) entry into target cells involves binding of the viral envelope (Env) to CD4 and a coreceptor, mainly CCR5 or CXCR4. The only currently licensed HIV entry inhibitor, maraviroc, targets CCR5, and the presence of CXCX4-using strains must be excluded prior to treatment. Co-receptor usage can be assessed by phenotypic assays or through genotypic prediction. Here we compared the performance of a phenotypic Env-Recombinant Viral Assay (RVA) to the two most widely used genotypic prediction algorithms, Geno2Pheno and webPSSM.Methods:Co-receptor tropism of samples from 73 subtype B and 219 non-B infections was measured phenotypically using a luciferase-tagged, NL4-3-based, RVA targeting Env. In parallel, tropism was inferred genotypically from the corresponding V3-loop sequences using Geno2Pheno (5-20% FPR) and webPSSM-R5X4. For discordant samples, phenotypic outcome was retested using co-receptor antagonists or the validated Trofile® Enhanced-Sensitivity-Tropism-Assay.Results:The lower detection limit of the RVA was 2.5% and 5% for X4 and R5 minority variants respectively. A phenotype/genotype result was obtained for 210 samples. Overall, concordance of phenotypic results with Geno2Pheno was 85.2% and concordance with webPSSM was 79.5%. For subtype B, concordance with Geno2pheno was 94.4% and concordance with webPSSM was 79.6%. High concordance of genotypic tools with phenotypic outcome was seen for subtype C (90% for both tools). Main discordances involved CRF01_AE and CRF02_AG for both algorithms (CRF01_AE: 35.9% discordances with Geno2Pheno and 28.2% with webPSSM; CRF02_AG: 20.7% for both algorithms). Genotypic prediction overestimated CXCR4-usage for both CRFs. For webPSSM, 40% discordance was observed for subtype A.Conclusions:Phenotypic assays remain the most accurate for most non-B subtypes and new subtype-specific rules should be developed for non-B subtypes, as research studies more and more draw conclusions from genotypically-inferred tropism, and to avoid unnecessarily precluding patients with limited treatment options from receiving maraviroc or other entry inhibitors. © 2013 Mulinge et al.
Bibliographic Details
10.1371/journal.pone.0060566; 10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g004; 10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g001
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84877294446&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23667426; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g004; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g004; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g003; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g004; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t001; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566&type=printable; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g002; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g001; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0060566; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.t001; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566.g004; http://www.plosone.org/article/metrics/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0060566; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060566&type=printable
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know