Home Nonlinear mixed-effects models for HIV viral load trajectories before and after antiretroviral therapy interruption, incorporating left censoring
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Nonlinear mixed-effects models for HIV viral load trajectories before and after antiretroviral therapy interruption, incorporating left censoring

  • Sihaoyu Gao ORCID logo , Lang Wu EMAIL logo , Tingting Yu , Roger Kouyos , Huldrych F. Günthard ORCID logo and Rui Wang ORCID logo
Published/Copyright: April 4, 2022

Abstract

Objectives

Characterizing features of the viral rebound trajectories and identifying host, virological, and immunological factors that are predictive of the viral rebound trajectories are central to HIV cure research. We investigate if key features of HIV viral decay and CD4 trajectories during antiretroviral therapy (ART) are associated with characteristics of HIV viral rebound following ART interruption.

Methods

Nonlinear mixed effect (NLME) models are used to model viral load trajectories before and following ART interruption, incorporating left censoring due to lower detection limits of viral load assays. A stochastic approximation EM (SAEM) algorithm is used for parameter estimation and inference. To circumvent the computational intensity associated with maximizing the joint likelihood, we propose an easy-to-implement three-step method.

Results

We evaluate the performance of the proposed method through simulation studies and apply it to data from the Zurich Primary HIV Infection Study. We find that some key features of viral load during ART (e.g., viral decay rate) are significantly associated with important characteristics of viral rebound following ART interruption (e.g., viral set point).

Conclusions

The proposed three-step method works well. We have shown that key features of viral decay during ART may be associated with important features of viral rebound following ART interruption.


Corresponding author: Lang Wu, Department of Statistics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, E-mail:

Funding source: Swiss National Science Foundation (to HFG)

Award Identifier / Grant number: 179571

Funding source: US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases

Award Identifier / Grant number: P01 AI131385

Award Identifier / Grant number: R01 AI136947

Funding source: An Ebert Career Development Award from Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute and Harvard Medical School

Funding source: The Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) discovery grant

Award Identifier / Grant number: 22R80742

Appendix: Model selection and diagnostics

In this section, we consider model selection and diagnostics for CD4 models. These viral load models are well studied in the literature (e.g., Wang et al. 2020; Wu and Ding 1999; Wu 2009). For the CD4 data, we considered log-transformation and square root transformation so that the transformed data are more compatible with the normality and constant variance assumptions. We find that these two transformations lead to similar results. More complex transformations, such as those based on the Box-Cox transformations, do not appear to improve the results substantially, and they are harder to interpret. Therefore, in the paper, we choose the square root transformation of CD4 counts since it is widely used in ACTG data analyses.

For CD4 model selections, since the CD4 model is secondary in the paper and CD4 data are measured with errors, we focus on the simplicity and goodness-of-fit of the candidate models. We find that a simple LME model captures the main features of the CD4 trajectories and it also fits the observed CD4 data reasonably well, i.e., in the paper, we choose the CD4 model:

CD 4 i j = α 1 i + α 2 i t i j + ε i j , α k i = α k + a k i , k = 1,2 ,

where CD4 ij is the original CD4 count for subject i measured at time t ij , α k ’s are fixed effects, and a ki ’s are random effects. Note that this simple CD4 model may also be interpreted as a classic measurement error model, where z i j * = α 1 i + α 2 i t i j may be interpreted as the unobserved true (transformed) CD4 value for subject i at time t ij . The AIC (BIC) values for the CD4 models with a quadratic term (and a random effect) and without a quadratic term are 2690 (2733) and 2733 (2759), respectively. Thus, adding a quadratic term t i j 2 does not appear to improve the model substantially but it may make the model more complicated and less stable.

Figure 4 shows the observed/fitted CD4 values for four randomly selected subjects. We see that the CD4 model captures the main features of the CD4 trajectories. Figure 5 shows the normal QQ-plots for the estimated random effects in the intercepts and slopes of the CD4 model. We see that the normality assumptions are mostly reasonable. Figure 6 shows the overall residual plots of the CD4 model. These model diagnostics indicate that the simple CD4 model is a reasonable choice.

Figure 4: 
Observed/fitted CD4 values for four randomly selected subjects. The solid lines represent individual fitted CD4 models, and the dots represent observed CD4 values.
Figure 4:

Observed/fitted CD4 values for four randomly selected subjects. The solid lines represent individual fitted CD4 models, and the dots represent observed CD4 values.

Figure 5: 
Normal QQ-plots for random effects in intercepts and slopes in the CD4 model.
Figure 5:

Normal QQ-plots for random effects in intercepts and slopes in the CD4 model.

Figure 6: 
Residual plot for the CD4 model.
Figure 6:

Residual plot for the CD4 model.

  1. Research funding: We gratefully acknowledge grants from US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases P01 AI131385, R01 AI136947, an Ebert Career Development Award from Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute and Harvard Medical School, and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) discovery grant 22R80742, and Swiss National Science Foundation, 179571.

References

Abrahams, M. R., S. B. Joseph, N. Garrett, L. Tyers, M. Moeser, N. Archin, O. D. Council, D. Matten, S. Zhou, D. Doolabh, C. Anthony, N. Goonetilleke, S. Abdool Karim, D. M. Margolis, S. K. Pond, C. Williamson, and R. Swanstrom. 2019. “The Replication-competent HIV-1 Latent Reservoir is Primarily Established Near the Time of Therapy Initiation.” Science Translational Medicine 11: 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aaw5589.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Bing, A., Y. Hu, M. Prague, A. L. Hill, J. Z. Li, R. J. Bosch, V. DeGruttola, and R. Wang. 2020. “Comparison of Empirical and Dynamic Models for HIV Viral Load Rebound after Treatment Interruption.” Statistical Communications in Infectious Diseases 12: 20190021 https://doi.org/10.1515/scid-2019-0021.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Carroll, R. J., D. Ruppert, L. A. Stefanski, and C. M. Crainiceanu. 2006. Measurement Error in Nonlinear Models: a Modern Perspective, 2nd ed. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC.10.1201/9781420010138Search in Google Scholar

Comets, E., A. Lavenu, and M. Lavielle. 2017. “Parameter Estimation in Nonlinear Mixed Effect Models Using Saemix, an R Implementation of the SAEM Algorithm.” Journal of Statistical Software 80: i03–41. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i03.Search in Google Scholar

Conway, J. M., A. S. Perelson, and J. Z. Li. 2019. “Predictions of Time to HIV Viral Rebound Following ART Suspension that Incorporate Personal Biomarkers.” PLoS Computational Biology 15: e1007229. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007229.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Delyon, B., M. Lavielle, and E. Moulines. 1999. “Convergence of a Stochastic Approximation Version of the EM Algorithm.” Annals of Statistics 27: 94–128. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1018031103.Search in Google Scholar

Dey, D. K., M.-H. Chen, and H. Chang. 1997. “Bayesian Approach for Nonlinear Random Effects Models.” Biometrics 53: 1239–52. https://doi.org/10.2307/2533493.Search in Google Scholar

Gianella, S., V. von Wyl, M. Fischer, B. Niederoest, M. Battegay, E. Bernasconi, M. Cavassini, A. Rauch, B. Hirschel, P. Vernazza, R. Weber, B. Joos, H. F. Günthard, and The Swiss HIV Cohort Study 2011. “Effect of Early Antiretroviral Therapy during Primary HIV-1 Infection on Cell-Associated HIV-1 DNA and Plasma HIV-1 RNA.” Antiviral Therapy 16: 535–45. https://doi.org/10.3851/imp1776.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Hill, A. L., D. I. Rosenbloom, E. Goldstein, E. Hanhauser, D. R. Kuritzkes, R. F. Siliciano, and T. J. Henrich. 2016. “Real-time Predictions of Reservoir Size and Rebound Time during Antiretroviral Therapy Interruption Trials for HIV.” PLoS Pathogens 12: e1005535. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1005535.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Huang, Y., X. Lu, J. Chen, J. Liang, and M. Zangmeister. 2018. “Joint Model-based Clustering of Nonlinear Longitudinal Trajectories and Associated Time-to-event Data Analysis, Linked by Latent Class Membership: With Application to AIDS Clinical Studies.” Lifetime Data Analysis 24: 699–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10985-017-9409-0.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Hughes, J. P. 1999. “Mixed Effects Models with Censored Data with Application to HIV RNA Levels.” Biometrics 55: 625–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341x.1999.00625.x.Search in Google Scholar

Hurst, J., M. Hoffmann, M. Pace, J. P. Williams, J. Thornhill, E. Hamlyn, J. Meyerowitz, C. Willberg, K. K. Koelsch, N. Robinson, H. Brown, M. Fisher, S. Kinloch, D. A. Cooper, M. Schechter, G. Tambussi, S. Fidler, A. Babiker, J. Weber, A. D. Kelleher, R. E. Phillips, and J. Frater 2015. “Immunological Biomarkers Predict HIV-1 Viral Rebound after Treatment Interruption.” Nature Communications 6: 8495. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9495.Search in Google Scholar

Julg, B., L. Dee, J. Ananworanich, D. H. Barouch, K. Bar, M. Caskey, D. J. Colby, L. Dawson, K. L. Dong, K. Dubé, J. Eron, J. Frater, R. T. Gandhi, R. Geleziunas, P. Goulder, G. J. Hanna, R. Jefferys, R. Johnston, D. Kuritzkes, J. Z. Li, U. Likhitwonnawut, J. van Lunzen, J. Martinez-Picado, V. Miller, and L. J. Montaner 2019. “Recommendations for Analytical Antiretroviral Treatment Interruptions in HIV Research Trials—Report of a Consensus Meeting.” The Lancet HIV 6: e259–e268. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2352-3018(19)30052-9.Search in Google Scholar

Kuhn, E., and M. Lavielle. 2005. “Maximum Likelihood Estimation in Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models.” Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 49: 1020–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2004.07.002.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Y., J. Nelder, and Y. Pawitan. 2017. Generalized Linear Models with Random Effects: Unified Analysis via h-likelihood, 2nd ed., vol. 153. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group.Search in Google Scholar

Li, J., B. Etemad, H. Ahmed, E. Aga, R. J. Bosch, J. W. Mellors, D. R. Kuritzkes, M. M. Lederman, M. Para, and R. T. Gandhi. 2016. “The Size of the Expressed HIV Reservoir Predicts Timing of Viral Rebound after Treatment Interruption.” AIDS 30: 1–353. https://doi.org/10.1097/qad.0000000000000953.Search in Google Scholar

Li, J. Z., D. M. Smith, and J. W. Mellors. 2015. “The Critical Roles of Treatment Interruption Studies and Biomarker Identification in the Search for an HIV Cure.” AIDS 29: 1429. https://doi.org/10.1097/qad.0000000000000658.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Lindstrom, M. J., and D. M. Bates. 1990. “Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models for Repeated Measures Data.” Biometrics 46: 673–87. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532087.Search in Google Scholar

Morris, T. P., I. R. White, and M. J. Crowther. 2019. “Using Simulation Studies to Evaluate Statistical Methods.” Statistics in Medicine 38: 2074–102. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.8086.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Namazi, G., J. M. Fajnzylber, E. Aga, R. J. Bosch, E. P. Acosta, R. Sharaf, W. Hartogensis, J. M. Jacobson, E. Connick, P. Volberding, D. Skiest, D. Margolis, M. C. Sneller, S. J. Little, S. Gianella, D. M. Smith, D. R. Kuritzkes, R. M. Gulick, J. W. Mellors, V. Mehraj, R. T. Gandhi, R. Mitsuyasu, R. T. Schooley, K. Henry, P. Tebas, and S. G. Deeks 2018. “The Control of HIV after Antiretroviral Medication Pause (CHAMP) Study: Posttreatment Controllers Identified from 14 Clinical Studies.” The Journal of infectious diseases 218: 1954–63. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiy479.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Noubary, F., and M. D. Hughes. 2012. “Factors Affecting Timing of Antiretroviral Treatment Initiation Based on Monitoring CD4 Counts.” Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes 61: 326. https://doi.org/10.1097/qai.0b013e31826be75e.Search in Google Scholar

Oxenius, A., A. R. McLean, M. Fischer, D. A. Price, S. J. Dawson, R. Hafner, C. Schneider, H. Joller, B. Hirschel, R. E. Phillips, R. Weber, and H. F. Günthard 2002. “Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Specific CD8+ T-cell Responses Do Not Predict Viral Growth and Clearance Rates during Structured Intermittent Antiretroviral Therapy.” Journal of Virology 76: 10169–76. https://doi.org/10.1128/jvi.76.20.10169-10176.2002.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Prague, M., J. M. Gerold, I. Balelli, C. Pasin, J. Z. Li, D. H. Barouch, J. B. Whitney, and A. L. Hill. 2019. “Viral Rebound Kinetics Following Single and Combination Immunotherapy for HIV/SIV,” BioRxiv: 700401.10.1101/700401Search in Google Scholar

Richman, D. D., D. M. Margolis, M. Delaney, W. C. Greene, D. Hazuda, and R. J. Pomerantz. 2009. “The Challenge of Finding a Cure for HIV Infection.” Science 323: 1304–7. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165706.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Rouzioux, C., L. Hocqueloux, and A. Sáez-Cirión. 2015. “Posttreatment Controllers: What Do They Tell Us?” Current Opinion in HIV and AIDS 10: 29–34. https://doi.org/10.1097/coh.0000000000000123.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Samson, A., M. Lavielle, and F. Mentré. 2006. “Extension of the SAEM Algorithm to Left-Censored Data in Nonlinear Mixed-Effects Model: Application to HIV Dynamics Model.” Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 51: 1562–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2006.05.007.Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, M. A., J. A. Aberg, P. Cahn, J. S. Montaner, G. Rizzardini, A. Telenti, J. M. Gatell, H. F. Günthard, S. M. Hammer, M. S. Hirsch, D. M. Jacobsen, P. Reiss, D. D. Richman, P. A. Volberding, P. Yeni, and R. T. Schooley 2010. “Antiretroviral Treatment of Adult HIV Infection: 2010 Recommendations of the International AIDS Society–USA Panel.” JAMA 304: 321–33. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.1004.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Vaida, F., A. P. Fitzgerald, and V. DeGruttola. 2007. “Efficient Hybrid EM for Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models with Censored Response.” Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 51: 5718–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2006.09.036.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Vaida, F., and L. Liu. 2009. “Fast Implementation for Normal Mixed Effects Models with Censored Response.” Journal of Computational & Graphical Statistics 18: 797–817. https://doi.org/10.1198/jcgs.2009.07130.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Von Wyl, V., S. Gianella, M. Fischer, B. Niederoest, H. Kuster, M. Battegay, E. Bernasconi, M. Cavassini, A. Rauch, B. Hirschel, P. Vernazza, R. Weber, B. Joos, and H. F. Günthard. 2011. “Early Antiretroviral Therapy During Primary HIV-1 Infection Results in a Transient Reduction of the Viral Setpoint upon Treatment Interruption.” PLoS One 6: e27463. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0027463.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Vonesh, E. F., H. Wang, L. Nie, and D. Majumdar. 2002. “Conditional Second-order Generalized Estimating Equations for Generalized Linear and Nonlinear Mixed-effects Models.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 97: 271–83. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214502753479400.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, R., A. Bing, C. Wang, Y. Hu, R. J. Bosch, and V. DeGruttola. 2020. “A Flexible Nonlinear Mixed Effects Model for HIV Viral Load Rebound after Treatment Interruption.” Statistics in Medicine 39: 2051–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.8529.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Wei, G. C., and M. A. Tanner. 1990. “A Monte Carlo Implementation of the EM Algorithm and the Poor Man’s Data Augmentation Algorithms.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 85: 699–704. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1990.10474930.Search in Google Scholar

Wu, H., and A. A. Ding. 1999. “Population HIV-1 Dynamics In Vivo: Applicable Models and Inferential Tools for Virological Data from Aids Clinical Trials.” Biometrics 55: 410–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341x.1999.00410.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Wu, L. 2002. “A Joint Model for Nonlinear Mixed-effects Models with Censoring and Covariates Measured with Error, with Application to AIDS Studies.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 97: 955–64. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214502388618744.Search in Google Scholar

Wu, L. 2009. Mixed Effects Models for Complex Data. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.10.1201/9781420074086Search in Google Scholar

Yu, T., L. Wu, and P. B. Gilbert. 2018. “A Joint Model for Mixed and Truncated Longitudinal Data and Survival Data, with Application to HIV Vaccine Studies.” Biostatistics 19: 374–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxx047.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Zhao, L., T. Chen, V. Novitsky, and R. Wang. 2021. “Joint Penalized Spline Modeling of Multivariate Longitudinal Data, with Application to HIV-1 RNA Load Levels and CD4 Cell Counts.” Biometrics 77: 1061–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.13339.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2021-01-26
Revised: 2022-01-28
Accepted: 2022-02-28
Published Online: 2022-04-04

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 24.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/scid-2021-0001/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button