There are no direct comparisons of the boosted PIs in second-line treatment after first-line failure on an NNRTI-based regimen and choice would be individualized to the patient. Sequencing from an EFV or NVP-based regimen to ETV is not recommended [35] although it remains an option when switched as part of a new combination when only K103N is present. Switching to RAL

or MVC with two active NRTIs is an option but is also not recommended in a patient with historical or selleck existing RT mutations/previous NRTI virological failure [36]. Less than 1% of patients harbour viruses with primary PI mutations and 10–20% NRTI mutations at 48 weeks, with 75% having WT virus [24, 27-29, 37, 38]. There are currently limited data regarding the efficacy of switching to another PI/r, NNRTI, MVC or RAL-based regimen and again the decision is individualized to the patient. However, switching to RAL, MVC or NNRTI in a patient with historical or existing RT mutations is not recommended because of an increased risk of virological failure and further emergence of resistance [36]. By contrast, because

of the high genetic barrier of PI/r, sequencing to a regimen that includes a new PI/r is unlikely to lead to further emergent resistance and is recommended. Where PI/r mutations exist, DRV/r is the preferred agent unless resistance is likely. Up to one-half of patients harbour viruses with primary integrase mutations Tyrosine-protein kinase BLK and 25% NRTI mutations at 48 weeks: approximately half have WT virus [26, 33, 37, 39]. Again, there BMS-777607 are no data supporting a switch to PI/r, NNRTI or MVC but sequencing to a new regimen that includes PI/r is unlikely to lead to further emergent resistance and is recommended. Switching to NNRTI or MVC with two active NRTIs is an option but is also

not recommended in a patient with historical or existing RT mutations/previous NRTI virological failure. Patients experiencing virological failure on RAL should switch to a new regimen as soon as possible to reduce the risk of accumulating resistance mutations that may affect susceptibility to newer INIs such as dolutegravir. We recommend patients with persistent viraemia and with limited options to construct a fully suppressive regimen are discussed/referred for expert advice (or through virtual clinic referral) (GPP). We recommend patients with triple-class resistance switch to a new ART regimen containing at least two and preferably three fully active agents with at least one active PI/r such as DRV/r or TPV/r and one agent with a novel mechanism (CCR5 receptor antagonist or integrase/fusion inhibitor) with ETV an option based on viral susceptibility (1C). Risk of development of triple-class virological failure is relatively low at about 9% at 9 years from start of ART [40].