Simulations Demonstrating the Effects of Varying the Degree of Resistance on Treatment Success Rates

<p>As in <a href="http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030133#pcbi-0030133-g005" target="_blank">Figures 5</a> and <a href="http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030133#pcbi-0030133-g006" target="_blank">6</a>, (A) and (C) demonstrate success rates as the duration of induction therapy is increased, and (B) and (D) demonstrate success rates over a range of induction therapy/therapy intensification start times. IC_50INT quantifies the degree of resistance that either mutation 1 or mutation 2 confers to drug I. IC_50MUT quantifies both the degree of resistance that mutation 3 confers to drug II and the degree of resistance that mutation 4 confers to drug III. <i>x</i>-Axis indicates duration of induction therapy in days (A,C), or interval between start of a 30-d induction therapy and maintenance therapy, in days (B,D). Maintenance therapy is assumed to start on day 0. <i>y</i>-Axis indicates percentage of simulations in which viral load remained undetectable for at least 3 y after ending induction therapy. Data in each panel were based on 400 simulations. Interpretation: IM therapy success rates decrease with the degree of resistance conferred by these mutations.