This was mainly explained by time since virological failure, as there was a higher prevalence of shorter time differences if t0 was closer to the date of virological failure. An initial phase of rapid accumulation followed by phases of slower accumulation were identified: 0.90/year (95% CI 0.84–0.95) for GRT pairs with a t0 within 6 months of the date of virological failure, 0.43/year (95% CI 0.32–0.56) for the period 7–18 months after failure

and 0.24/year (95% CI 0.15–0.34) for the period >18 months after failure (supporting information, Table S2). The overall estimated rate was slower when the analysis was restricted to 14 participants who had failed the NNRTI regimen that they started when they were ART-naïve: four http://www.selleckchem.com/products/azd4547.html new NNRTI mutations over 18 PYFU (rate 0.22/year; 95% CI 0.06–0.57). In contrast, when only the first GRT pair per patient was used, the rate was higher than the average estimate at 1.02/year (95% CI 0.85–0.12; supporting

information, Table S4). Table 2b shows that the rate of accumulation was higher in patients with a virus predicted at t0 to be susceptible to the NNRTI used, at 1.56/year (95% CI 1.27–1.89; 86 mutations over 55 PYFU), compared with those with a virus predicted to be resistant, for whom the rate was 0.39/year (95% CI 0.33–0.46; 93 mutations over 236 PYFU). Despite the slower accumulation of etravirine-specific mutations, overall the predicted ERK inhibitor etravirine activity showed the largest drop, decreasing from 0.69 (meaning that the activity of etravirine was already reduced by a third at t0) to 0.62, resulting in an absolute mean change of 0.28/year (Table 2c). This drop was even more CYTH4 dramatic when we restricted the analysis to GRT pairs started within 3 months of virological

failure (0.49/year when starting from almost fully susceptible; Table 2d). On the basis of these estimates and assuming a piecewise linear model, we predict that it should take approximately 1.0 year (calculated as 0.5/0.49) of exposure to a virologically failing regimen including nevirapine or efavirenz to reduce etravirine activity from fully susceptible to intermediate resistant [and a further 1.8 years (0.50/0.28) to reach zero activity]. As a consequence of rapid accumulation of classic NNRTI resistance upon failure, both nevirapine and efavirenz had lost almost all their activity at t0, even when the analysis was restricted to 165 pairs in which t0 was within 3 months of the date of failure (Table 2c and d). In the Poisson regression analysis, independent predictors of a slower accumulation of NNRTI mutations were a more recent calendar year of t0 (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.69–0.93; P=0.004; Table 3), a longer interval from the time of last virological suppression on the NNRTI (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.64–0.91; P=0.003) and receiving nevirapine instead of efavirenz (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.46–0.95; P=0.03). Patients receiving a fully active NNRTI accumulated mutations much more rapidly than those with a virus that was already resistant to their NNRTI (RR 3.