Risk factors for virologic failure and persistent low-level viremia in people with HIV experiencing low-level viremia: Chongqing ART cohort study, 2019–2023

Abstract

Background:

Low-level viremia (LLV) during effective antiretroviral therapy (ART) presents ongoing management challenges globally, with reported prevalence rates of 10–46% in resource-limited settings. The clinical significance of LLV remains controversial: while some studies demonstrate that viral load (VL) levels exceeding 200 copies/mL predict virologic failure (VF), others report no significant association. This uncertainty underscores the need for clearer risk stratification in diverse clinical settings.

Objective:

To investigate risk factors for VF and persistent low-level viremia (pLLV) in HIV-1-infected individuals experiencing LLV.

Design:

A retrospective cohort study between January 2019 and December 2023, consisting of 1,214 individuals with LLV (defined as plasma HIV-1 RNA levels of 50–999 copies/mL detected at two consecutive time points following previously undetected viral loads) at a large specialized hospital in Chongqing, China.

Methods:

Clinical data, including demographics, ART regimens, adherence, baseline viral load (VL), CD4 + T-cell counts, and LLV characteristics, were extracted from medical records. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with VF (defined as one or more HIV VLs of ≥1,000 copies/mL) and pLLV (defined as at least three consecutive measurements of VL within the range of 50 to 999 copies/mL), with adjustments for potential confounders.

Results:

Among 1,214 participants with LLV, 2.64% (32/1,214) developed VF, and 28.09% (341/1,214) developed pLLV. Protective factors against VF included baseline VL < 1,000 copies/mL (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.100, 95%CI: 0.013–0.765) and VL < 200 copies/mL during LLV (aOR = 0.157, 95%CI: 0.071–0.540). Viral blips (transient LLV) independently predicted VF (aOR = 4.6775, 95%CI: 1.392–15.704). For pLLV, baseline VL < 1,000 copies/mL remained protective (aOR = 0.569, 95% CI: 0.329–0.984), while primary education or lower was a risk factor (aOR = 2.052, 95%CI: 1.014–4.194).

Conclusion:

VL levels during LLV and baseline VL predict VF risk, emphasizing the need for vigilant VL monitoring and adherence support.

Introduction

As of December 2023, an estimated 3.99 million individuals globally were living with HIV (1, 2), with China accounting for 1.29 million reported cases. Chongqing, the site of China’s first documented AIDS case in 1993, had registered approximately 68,000 people with HIV by October 2023. Of these, approximately 62,000 (91.2%) received antiretroviral therapy (ART). During the first 10 months of 2023, the region reported 7,154 new diagnoses and 2,729 deaths among people with AIDS.

ART has transformed HIV management through plasma viral load (VL) suppression, immune function preservation, and delayed disease progression, significantly improving survival of people receiving treatment while reducing transmission risks. Nevertheless, ART regimens fail to achieve complete viral replication suppression in some patients, leading to two distinct virological patterns: (1) persistent low-level viremia (pLLV), defined as sustained VL ranging from 20 to 999 copies/mL, depending on the diagnostic thresholds, and (2) transient viremic episodes, termed blips. Current guidelines show significant variation in LLV definitions: the European AIDS Clinical Society (EACS) uses 20–50 copies/mL (3–5), while U. S. DHHS recommends 50–200 copies/mL (6–9) (prevalence 3.5–9.9%) (10) and WHO adopts 50–999 copies/mL for resource-limited settings (11–14) (prevalence 10–46%) (15, 16). No existing guidelines recommend ART modification specifically for LLV management.

The pathophysiology of LLV remains incompletely characterized, with two predominant mechanistic theories: (1) activation of latent viral reservoirs, and (2) ongoing viral production from pharmacological sanctuary sites. Clinical evidence regarding LLV’s association with VF shows persistent contradictions. While VL levels exceeding 200 copies/mL demonstrate predictive value for VF in multiple studies (15, 17, 18), other investigations report no significant association (1). Similarly, the clinical significance of blips and pLLV remains controversial, though sustained LLV (50–200 copies/mL) may elevate VF risk according to some cohort studies (4, 19–22).

This retrospective analysis of longitudinal data from a large specialized hospital in Chongqing, China, addresses two critical gaps: (1) whether specific LLV types (pLLV vs. blips) predict subsequent VF, and (2) which clinical factors predispose LLV patients to VF. Our results provide actionable insights for optimizing ART strategies to achieve early virological suppression, particularly in resource-limited clinical environments.

Methods

Study population

This retrospective study analyzed a cohort of individuals receiving treatment for HIV-1 with long-term follow-up from 2019 to 2023 at a large specialized hospital in Chongqing, China. All individuals received ART following the Chinese HIV/AIDS diagnosis and treatment guidelines. Follow-up visits occurred every 3 to 6 months to assess VL, CD4 + T-cell counts, and other routine clinical parameters. Sociodemographic data, including gender, age at HIV diagnosis, marital status, education level, ethnicity, and mode of transmission, were collected. Clinical information, such as ART duration (months), time from diagnosis to ART initiation, ART regimen, and laboratory findings, including VL, CD4 + T-cell count, was retrieved from clinical follow-up records. Medication adherence was assessed using follow-up case notes and pharmacy administration records. LLV was defined as the occurrence of one (blips) or two consecutive VL measurements of 50–999 copies/mL after virologic suppression while pLLV was defined as three or more consecutive VLs of 50–999 copies/mL, at least 1 month apart (1); VF was defined as one or more HIV VLs of ≥1,000 copies/mL; and virological suppression was defined as VL < 50 copies/mL. Baseline refers to clinical and laboratory parameters measured at the initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART), including but not limited to plasma HIV RNA VL, CD4 + T-cell count, and initial ART regimen. Patients were excluded if they: (1) had an insufficient number of post-baseline viral load measurements (< 3) during follow-up, or (2) had no VL values meeting the pre-specified LLV definition (i.e., detectable viremia between 50 and 999 copies/mL after achieving virological suppression).

Statistical analysis

Collected data were organized using Excel and analyzed with SPSS software (version 25). Quantitative variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (X ± S), with group comparisons performed using the independent two-sample t-test or analysis of variance (ANOVA). Qualitative variables were presented as proportions or component ratios, with statistical comparisons conducted using the χ² test, Fisher’s exact probability method, or the Kruskal-Wallis test, as appropriate. Logistic regression models were employed for univariate and multivariate analyses to identify potential risk factors, with a significance level set at α = 0.05.

Results

Population characteristics and clinical features

A total of 1,214 people living with HIV with LLV were included. The median age was 42 (IQR, 31–56), and 79.74% (968/1,214) were male. Demographics included 34.93% (424/1,214) married, 28.67% (348/1,214) single, and 60.96% (740/1,214) Han Chinese. Transmission routes were predominantly heterosexual contact (44.89%, 545/1,214), followed by men who have sex with men (MSM) (9.14%, 111/1,214) and drug use (1.07%, 13/1,214). Median baseline VL was 74,850 copies/mL (IQR, 330–487,000), and median CD4 + nadir T-cell counts during ART were 146 cells/μL (IQR,56–254) and 157 cells/μL (IQR,61–297) at baseline. CD4 + T-cell counts< 200 cells/μL at baseline occurred in 59.56% (723/1,214). Median VL during LLV was 92 copies/mL (IQR, 67–146), with 83.53% (1,014/1,214) < 200 copies/mL, 10.87% (132/1,214) had a viral load of 200–400 copies/mL, and 5.60% (68/1,214) had a viral load of 401–999 copies/mL. Median LLV duration was 14 months (IQR, 10.00–21.00). Most patients (90.94%, 1,104/1,214) initiated ART within 1 year of diagnosis. NNRTI-based regimens predominated (67.38%, 818/1,214), followed by INSTI-based (19.85%, 241/1,214) and PI-based regimens (5.19%, 63/1,214). Blips occurred in 67.71% (822/1,214) and pLLV in 32.29% (392/1,214). During LLV, 21.33% (259/1,214) modified ART regimens. Medication adherence was high (96.21%, 1,168/1,214). Comprehensive data are presented in Table 1.

Risk factor analysis

Among 32 VF cases, χ² tests identified significant associations with baseline VL (χ² = 12.101, p = 0.002), LLV-phase VL (χ² = 22.125, p < 0.001), blips/pLLV (χ² = 7.893, p = 0.005), and suboptimal adherence (χ² = 9.307, p = 0.025) (Table 1). For 341 pLLV patients, significant correlates included age (χ² = 21.333, p = 0.001), marital status (χ² = 9.863, p = 0.043), education (χ² = 12.008, p = 0.007), baseline VL (χ² = 14.351, p = 0.001), ART regimen (χ² = 16.225, p = 0.003).

Key subgroup differences in risk factors for virologic outcomes

Subgroup analyses stratified by transmission route (MSM vs. non-MSM) and ART regimen (INSTI-based vs. non-INSTI-based) revealed distinct patterns. In the MSM transmission subgroup (n = 111, 3.6% VF rate), LLV levels < 200 copies/mL (OR = 0.074, 95%CI: 0.009–0.611; p = 0.016) and baseline log_₁₀ VL < 3 (OR = 0.169, 95%CI: 0.036–0.789; p = 0.024) were protective, though extreme OR values for blips (vs pLLV) and adherence due to small sample size limited interpretability. The non-MSM subgroup (n = 1,103, 2.54% VF rate) showed strong protective effects of blips (adjusted OR = 10.434, 95%CI: 1.355–80.331; p = 0.024) and LLV < 200 copies/mL (OR = 0.176, 95%CI: 0.035–0.896; p = 0.036), with baseline log_₁₀ VL 3–5 associated with elevated VF risk (adjusted OR = 6.671, 95%CI: 1.245–35.736; p = 0.027); lower education correlated with pLLV, while unmarried status was protective. The INSTI-based regimen subgroup (n = 241, 2.07% VF rate) showed a protective trend for adherence (OR = 0.087, 95%CI: 0.008–0.928; p = 0.043) but unreliable blip results. The non-INSTI subgroup (n = 973, 2.77% VF rate) confirmed protective effects of baseline log₁₀ VL < 3 (OR = 0.100, 95%CI: 0.013–0.771; p = 0.027), LLV < 200 copies/mL (OR = 0.193, 95%CI: 0.067–0.552; p = 0.002), and blips (OR = 3.382, 95%CI: 1.007–11.356; p = 0.049) (Tables 2, 3).

Multivariate analysis

Multivariate analysis demonstrated that a baseline log₁₀ VL < 3 (aOR: 0.100, 95%CI: 0.013–0.765) was a protective factor against VF compared with baseline log_₁₀ VL > 5. Additionally, VL < 200 copies/mL during LLV (aOR: 0.196, 95% CI: 0.071–0.540) showed protective effects relative to VL > 401–999 copies/mL (Table 4). For pLLV patients, baseline log_₁₀VL < 3 remained protective versus log_₁₀VL > 5. Lower educational attainment (≤elementary school) emerged as a pLLV risk factor, though other demographic and treatment factors showed no independent associations (Table 5).

Discussion

To our knowledge, this represents the first large-scale investigation of clinical correlates in people with HIV-1 and LLV from Chongqing, identifying distinct risk factors for VF and pLLV. Key protective factors against VF included baseline log₁₀VL < 3 and LLV-phase VL < 200 copies/mL, while baseline log_₁₀VL < 3 also demonstrated protection against pLLV. Lower educational attainment (≤elementary school) emerged as a pLLV risk factor.

The inverse relationship between baseline VL and VF risk aligns with established evidence linking elevated pre-ART viremia to treatment failure (15, 23–26). Contemporary data from INSTI-era cohorts corroborate this pattern, with baseline VL > 1.0E+05 copies/mL associated with the risks of LLV/VF even under integrase inhibitors (27). Our findings extend these observations by demonstrating differential risk stratification across LLV levels: blips (>200 copies/mL) and persistent LLV (50–200 copies/mL) both conferred elevated VF risk (1, 4, 17, 19, 28). These discrepancies likely stem from heterogeneous LLV definitions across studies, particularly regarding the interpretation of blips. In our research, blips were defined as VL measurements within 50–1,000 copies/mL across one-month intervals criterion that differs from conventional within 30 days observation windows used in other cohorts (17). This methodological variation in blips characterization underscores the critical need for standardized virologic monitoring protocols.

Our study identified LLV level as a prognostic determinant, with individuals having a VL > 200 copies/mL demonstrating significantly higher risk of virologic rebound compared to those with VL between 50 and 199 copies/mL. LLV with VL < 200 copies/mL was found to be a protective factor against VF risk. These findings align with those of Hermans LE et al. (12), who reported that LLV (VL of 51–999 copies/mL) significantly increased the risk of subsequent VF (VL > 1,000 copies/mL) in a large multicenter cohort of adults receiving suppressive first-line cART (aHR: 2.6, 95% CI: 2.5–2.8). Tavitiya Sudjaritruk et al. also observed a significantly higher incidence of VF in children with LLV of high VL (400–1,000 copies/mL) compared to those with LLV of low VL (<400 copies/mL) (p < 0.001) (29). High-level VL during LLV may serve as an indicator of increased VF risk in these populations. These consistent patterns across populations suggest implementing stricter LLV thresholds (< 200 copies/mL) could optimize clinical monitoring strategies through: (1) Enhanced adherence tracking; (2) Frequent virologic surveillance, and (3) Timely resistance testing.

Subgroup analyses further highlight the heterogeneity of risk factors across distinct populations, revealing nuanced predictors of virologic outcomes. Subgroup analyses highlight the heterogeneity of risk factors across populations. In MSM individuals, the protective role of low LLV and baseline VL aligns with overall trends, but small sample size hinders interpretation of blips and adherence effects, emphasizing the need for larger MSM cohorts. Non-MSM populations show distinct vulnerabilities: moderate baseline VL (3–5 log) emerges as a risk factor, potentially reflecting differences in viral reservoir dynamics or treatment adherence, while sociodemographic factors (e.g., education, marital status) influence pLLV risk, underscoring the importance of tailored support for low-education groups. INSTI-based regimens demonstrate lower VF rates, with adherence showing promise, but blips effects require confirmation in larger samples. Consistently, non-INSTI subgroups validate low baseline VL, low LLV, and iLLV as robust protective markers, reinforcing their universal relevance. These findings support stratified monitoring: prioritizing LLV surveillance in MSM, intensified follow-up for non-MSM with moderate baseline VL, and further investigation of INSTI-specific dynamics to optimize targeted ART strategies.

The protective effect of lower baseline VL (log₁₀ < 3) against pLLV may reflect reduced viral reservoir size, as elevated zenith VL correlates with increased cell-associated HIV DNA (30). This reservoir dynamic necessitates prolonged ART duration for effective suppression, potentially explaining pLLV persistence in patients with high initial viremia (31). The association between limited education and pLLV risk likely stems from multifaceted care continuum challenges: delayed diagnosis, suboptimal ART understanding, and adherence barriers in populations with lower educational attainment. Notably, while suboptimal adherence is an expected mediator, it was not identified as an independent risk factor in our analysis. This discrepancy may arise from study design factors: First, the exclusion of patients with irregular follow-up or missing VL data-a group potentially enriched with adherence challenges and socioeconomic vulnerability—may have diluted measurable adherence effects. Second, adherence assessments relying on self-report and pharmacy records could underestimate true non-adherence, particularly among individuals with lower educational attainment who may not recognize occasional missed doses as significant. Consequently, lower education likely functions as a surrogate marker for socioeconomic barriers (e.g., constrained healthcare access) that contribute to pLLV through mechanisms extending beyond medication-taking behaviors. Based on these findings, we propose two resource-optimized strategies: (1) Implement risk-stratified monitoring for patients with LLV > 200 copies/mL through intensified follow-up and adherence interventions; (2) Strengthen community health worker supervision networks for individuals with primary-level education or less, utilizing on-site medication oversight by community physicians to reduce pLLV risk.

Study limitations

First, the retrospective design constraints limited data completeness, introducing potential selection bias. Second, Adherence measurement relied on composite self-report and pharmacy records rather than objective methods like electronic monitoring. While this approach is pragmatic for large-scale clinical cohorts, it may overestimate true adherence levels, particularly for marginal adherence cases near the 95% threshold. Third, DNA quantification, a pivotal metric for assessing the magnitude of the viral reservoir, remains absent from routine clinical care in China. As a result, we were precluded from exploring its relationship with LLV and the ensuing clinical outcomes, a significant limitation given the critical role of viral reservoir dynamics in HIV disease progression. Additionally, our study did not assess the influence of co-infections (e.g., viral hepatitis or tuberculosis) on LLV outcomes. Future studies should systematically evaluate comorbidities to determine their impact on LLV persistence and treatment outcomes (32). Finally, while acquired resistance likely mediates LLV-VF progression, future studies need to systematically analyze what types of drug resistance mutations develop when patients have persistent low-level viruses in their blood (33).

References

• 1.

  Laprise C de Pokomandy A Baril JG Dufresne S Trottier H . Virologic Failure Following Persistent Low-Level Viremia in a Cohort of Hiv-Positive Patients: Results from 12 Years of Observation. Clin Infect Dis. (2013) 57:1489–96. doi: 10.1093/cid/cit529

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2.

  Joint United Nations Programme on HA The Path That Ends Aids: 2023 Unaids Global Aids Update. (2023). Geneva: Switzerland.

  • Google Scholar

• 3.

  Maggiolo F Callegaro A Fau-Cologni G Fau CG Bernardini C Fau BC et al . Ultrasensitive Assessment of Residual Low-Level HIV Viremia in HAART-Treated Patients and Risk of Virological Failure. J Acquir. Immune Defic Syndr. (2012) 15:473–82. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0b013e3182567a57

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4.

  Pernas B Grandal M Pertega S Cañizares A Castro-Iglesias Á Mena Á et al . Any impact of blips and low-level viraemia episodes among Hiv-infected patients with sustained virological suppression on art?J Antimicrob Chemother. (2016) 71:1051. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkv433

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5.

  Ryom LA-O Boesecke C Bracchi M Ambrosioni J Pozniak A Arribas J et al . Highlights of the 2017 European Aids Clinical Society (Eacs) guidelines for the treatment of adult Hiv-positive persons version 9.0. HIV Med. (2018) 19:309–15. doi: 10.1111/hiv.12600

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6.

  Pernas B Rego-Pérez I Tabernilla A Balboa V Relaño S Grandal M et al . Plasma Mitochondrial DNA Levels Are Inversely Associated with Hiv-Rna Levels and Directly with Cd4 Counts: Potential Role as a Biomarker of Hiv Replication. J Antimicrob Chemother. (2017) 72:3159–62. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkx272

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7.

  Swenson LC Cobb B Geretti AM Harrigan PR Poljak M Seguin-Devaux C et al . Comparative Performances of Hiv-1 Rna Load Assays at Low Viral Load Levels: Results of an International Collaboration. J Clin Microbiol. (2014) 52:517–23. doi: 10.1128/jcm.02461-13

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8.

  Torres B Guardo AC Leal L Leon A Lucero C Alvarez-Martinez MJ et al . Protease Inhibitor Monotherapy Is Associated with a Higher Level of Monocyte Activation, Bacterial Translocation and Inflammation. J Int AIDS Soc. (2014) 17:19246. doi: 10.7448/ias.17.1.19246

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9.

  AIDS Research Advisory Council . Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in Adults and Adolescents Living with Hiv. Rockville, MD: OARAC (2017).

  • Google Scholar

• 10.

  Elen S Bjorkman P Zazzi M Bohm M Bernal E Sonnerborg A et al . Low-Level Hiv Viraemia During Antiretroviral Therapy: Longitudinal Patterns and Predictors of Viral Suppression. HIV Med. (2024) 25:107–16. doi: 10.1111/hiv.13541

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11.

  WHO . Consolidated Guidelines on Hiv Prevention, Diagnosis, Treatment and Care for Key Populations—2016 Update. Geneva: WHO Guidelines Approved by the Guidelines Review Committee (2016).

  • Google Scholar

• 12.

  Hermans LE Moorhouse M Carmona S Grobbee DE Hofstra LM Richman DD et al . Effect of HIV-1 low-level viraemia during antiretroviral therapy on treatment outcomes in WHO-guided South African treatment programmes: a multicentre cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. (2018) 18:188–97. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30681-3

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13.

  Esber A Polyak C Kiweewa F Maswai J Owuoth J Maganga L et al . Persistent Low-Level Viremia Predicts Subsequent Virologic Failure: Is It Time to Change the Third 90?Clin Infect Dis. (2019) 69:805–12. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy989

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14.

  Dravid AN Natrajan K Kulkarni MM Saraf CK Mahajan US Kore SD et al . Discordant Csf/Plasma Hiv-1 Rna in Individuals on Virologically Suppressive Antiretroviral Therapy in Western India. Medicine. (2018) 97:e9969. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000009969

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15.

  Bernal E Gomez JM Jarrin I Cano A Munoz A Alcaraz A et al . Low-Level Viremia Is Associated with Clinical Progression in Hiv-Infected Patients Receiving Antiretroviral Treatment. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. (2018) 78:329–37. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000001678

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16.

  Liu J Li C Sun Y Fu C Wei S Zhang X et al . Characteristics of Drug Resistance Mutations in Art-Experienced Hiv-1 Patients with Low-Level Viremia in Zhengzhou City, China. Sci Rep. (2024) 14:10620. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-60965-z

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17.

  Cuzin L Flandre P Allavena C Palich R Duvivier C Becker A et al . Low-level viral loads and virological failure in the integrase strand transfer era. J Antimicrob Chemother. (2023) 78:1111–6. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkad056

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18.

  Elvstam O Malmborn K Elen S Marrone G Garcia F Zazzi M et al . Virologic Failure Following Low-Level Viremia and Viral Blips During Antiretroviral Therapy: Results from a European Multicenter Cohort. Clin Infect Dis. (2023) 76:25–31. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciac762

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19.

  Grennan JT Loutfy MR Su D Harrigan PR Cooper C Klein M et al . Magnitude of Virologic Blips Is Associated with a Higher Risk for Virologic Rebound in Hiv-Infected Individuals: A Recurrent Events Analysis. J Infect Dis. (2012) 205:1230–8. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jis104

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20.

  Han WM Broom J Bopage R Templeton DJ Edmiston N Petoumenos K et al . Investigating Rates and Predictors of Viral Blips, Low-Level Viraemia and Virological Failure in the Australian Hiv Observational Database. Trop Med Int Health. (2024) 29:42–56. doi: 10.1111/tmi.13951

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21.

  Joya C Won SH Schofield C Lalani T Maves RC Kronmann K et al . Persistent Low-Level Viremia While on Antiretroviral Therapy Is an Independent Risk Factor for Virologic Failure. Clin Infect Dis. (2019) 69:2145–52. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciz129

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22.

  Vandenhende MA Perrier A Bonnet F Lazaro E Cazanave C Reigadas S et al . Risk of Virological Failure in Hiv-1-Infected Patients Experiencing Low-Level Viraemia under Active Antiretroviral Therapy (Anrs C03 Cohort Study). Antivir Ther. (2015) 20:655–60. doi: 10.3851/IMP2949

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23.

  Boillat-Blanco N Darling KE Schoni-Affolter F Vuichard D Rougemont M Fulchini R et al . Virological outcome and management of persistent low-level viraemia in Hiv-1-infected patients: 11 years of the Swiss Hiv cohort study. Antivir Ther. (2015) 20:165–75. doi: 10.3851/IMP2815

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24.

  Farmer A Wang X Ganesan A Deiss RG Agan BK O'Bryan TA et al . Factors Associated with Hiv Viral Load "Blips" and the Relationship between Self-Reported Adherence and Efavirenz Blood Levels on Blip Occurrence: A Case-Control Study. AIDS Res Ther. (2016) 13:16. doi: 10.1186/s12981-016-0100-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25.

  Quiros-Roldan E Raffetti E Castelli F Focà E Castelnuovo F Di Pietro M et al . Low-Level Viraemia, Measured as Viraemia Copy-Years, as a Prognostic Factor for Medium-Long-Term All-Cause Mortality: A Master Cohort Study. J Antimicrob Chemother. (2016) 71:3519–27. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkw307

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26.

  Wright ST Hoy J Mulhall B O'Connor CC Petoumenos K Read T et al . Determinants of Viremia Copy-Years in People with Hiv/Aids after Initiation of Antiretroviral Therapy. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. (2014) 66:55–64. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000000125

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27.

  Álvarez H Rava M Martínez C Portilla J Peraire J Rivero A et al . Predictors of low-level HIV viraemia and virological failure in the era of integrase inhibitors: a Spanish nationwide cohort. HIV Med. (2022) 23:825–36. doi: 10.1111/hiv.13265

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28.

  Castillo-Mancilla JR Morrow M Coyle RP Coleman SS Zheng JH Ellison L et al . Low-Level Viremia Is Associated with Cumulative Adherence to Antiretroviral Therapy in Persons with Hiv. Open Forum Infect Dis. (2021) 8:ofab463. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofab463

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29.

  Sudjaritruk T Teeraananchai S Kariminia A Lapphra K Kumarasamy N Fong MS et al . Impact of Low-Level Viraemia on Virological Failure among Asian Children with Perinatally Acquired Hiv on First-Line Combination Antiretroviral Treatment: A Multicentre, Retrospective Cohort Study. J Int AIDS Soc. (2020) 23:e25550. doi: 10.1002/jia2.25550

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30.

  Wirden M Todesco E Valantin MA Lambert-Niclot S Simon A Calin R et al . Low-Level Hiv-1 Viraemia in Patients on Haart: Risk Factors and Management in Clinical Practice. J Antimicrob Chemother. (2015) 70:2347–53. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkv099

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31.

  Vancoillie L Demecheleer E Callens S Vogelaers D Vandekerckhove L Mortier V et al . Markers associated with persisting low-level viraemia under antiretroviral therapy in HIV-1 infection. J Antimicrob Chemother. (2014) 69:1098–103. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkt484

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32.

  Ganesan A Hsieh HC Chu X Colombo RE Berjohn C Lalani T et al . Low Level Viremia Is Associated with Serious Non-Aids Events in People with Hiv. Open Forum Infect Dis. (2024) 11:ofae147. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofae147

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33.

  Zhao S Wang W Li S He J Duan W Fang Z et al . The Prevalence of Low-Level Viraemia and Its Association with Virological Failure in People Living with Hiv: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Emerg Microbes Infect. (2025) 14:2447613. doi: 10.1080/22221751.2024.2447613

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar