Divergent Paths: A Comparative Phylodynamic Analysis of Influenza and HIV Evolution

Abstract

This article provides a comparative analysis of the evolutionary dynamics of Influenza and HIV, two viruses with profound global health impacts. Tailored for researchers and drug development professionals, it explores the foundational mechanisms—from mutation rates to recombination—that shape their distinct phylogenetic trees. The scope extends to methodological applications of phylodynamics and AI in surveillance and vaccine design, addresses troubleshooting challenges like antigenic drift and drug resistance, and offers a validation of strategies through comparative outcomes. By synthesizing insights across these four intents, this review aims to inform future research and the development of more effective, evolution-informed biomedical interventions.

Unraveling Core Evolutionary Drivers: Contrasting the Genetic Blueprints of Influenza and HIV

This guide provides a comparative analysis of the genomic architectures of segmented RNA viruses, exemplified by Influenza A virus (IAV), and integrated retroviral DNA, as represented by Human Immunodeficiency Virus type 1 (HIV-1). The distinct evolutionary pathways of these pathogens—shaped by reassortment and recombination, respectively—have profound implications for their phylogenies, population dynamics, and the development of therapeutic interventions. The supporting data, derived from advanced structural and genomic techniques, are summarized to provide a clear, objective comparison for researchers and drug development professionals.

Table 1: Core Genomic and Evolutionary Features

Feature	Segmented RNA Virus (Influenza A)	Integrated Retroviral DNA (HIV-1)
Genome Type	Negative-sense, single-stranded RNA (ssRNA) segmented genome [1] [2]	Positive-sense, single-stranded RNA (ssRNA) reverse-transcribed into DNA for integration [3] [4]
Genome State in Virion	8 distinct viral ribonucleoprotein (vRNP) complexes [1] [2]	Dimeric RNA genome within a core particle [4]
Integration into Host Genome	No integration; replication occurs in the nucleus without chromosomal incorporation [2]	Yes; viral DNA (vDNA) is integrated into host chromatin to form a provirus [3]
Primary Evolutionary Mechanism	Reassortment: Exchange of entire genome segments during co-infection [5]	Recombination: Template switching during reverse transcription and error-prone replication [6]
Key Interaction for Packaging/Replication	Inter-segment RNA-RNA interactions (tRRIs) form a complex network for selective co-packaging [1] [2]	Host-vRNA interactions: e.g., Primer Binding Site (PBS) with cognate tRNA and host RNA helicase A (RHA) [7]
Impact on Phylogeny	Frequent "antigenic shifts" from reassortment create radically new strains, leading to discontinuous phylogenies [5] [1]	Complex, branching phylogenies with extensive intra-host diversity due to recombination and mutation [6]

---

Experimental Methodologies for Structural Genomic Analysis

Understanding the genomic architecture of these viruses relies on cutting-edge biochemical and sequencing techniques.

Probing RNA Secondary Structure In Vivo and In Virio

Selective 2'-Hydroxyl Acylation Analyzed by Primer Extension (SHAPE) is a key method for determining RNA secondary structures. It differentiates between base-paired and single-stranded nucleotides by measuring the reactivity of the RNA's 2'-hydroxyl group to chemical reagents like 1-methyl-7-nitroisatoic anhydride (1M7) or NAI [8] [9]. When coupled with Mutational Profiling (MaP), the method allows for high-throughput, high-resolution structure analysis of low-abundance RNAs in their native contexts (e.g., inside virions or cells) [1] [9].

• Workflow: Live virions or infected cells are treated with a SHAPE reagent. The modified RNA is then reverse-transcribed under conditions that introduce mutations at the modification sites. Subsequent next-generation sequencing identifies these mutations, allowing for the calculation of nucleotide-resolution reactivity profiles that inform secondary structure models [9].

Mapping Inter-Molecular RNA Interactions

SPLASH (Sequencing of Psoralen crosslinked, Ligated, And Selected Hybrids) is used to identify direct RNA-RNA interactions within viral genomes [1].

• Workflow: Purified virions are treated with psoralen, a crosslinking agent that covalently links base-paired RNAs. The crosslinked RNA complexes are digested and ligated, creating chimeric molecules from interacting RNA segments. After crosslink reversal and sequencing, the chimeric reads reveal a network of interaction loci [1].

Recovering and Mapping Retroviral Integration Sites

The precise mapping of retroviral integration sites has evolved to use ligation-mediated PCR (LM-PCR) coupled with next-generation sequencing [3].

• Workflow: Genomic DNA from infected cells is fragmented, and adapters are ligated to the ends. Integration sites are selectively amplified using primers specific to the viral Long Terminal Repeat (LTR) and the adapter sequence. High-throughput sequencing of the amplicons allows for the simultaneous mapping of millions of unique integration sites, revealing global preferences and biases within the host genome [3].

Comparative Architecture and Key Experimental Data

Segmented RNA Virus (Influenza A) Packaging and Reassortment

Influenza A virus faces the challenge of selectively packaging one copy of each of its eight distinct genomic segments into a single virion. This process is governed by a redundant network of trans-acting RNA-RNA interactions (tRRIs) [2].

Table 2: Experimental Data on Influenza A Virus Genomic Architecture

Parameter	Experimental Finding	Method Used	Implication
Number of Inter-segment Interactions	611 interaction loci identified in common between replicates in the WSN strain [1].	SPLASH [1]	Packaging is guided by a complex, redundant network of interactions, not a finite set of signals.
Interaction Strength	Median free energy (ΔG) of -18 kcal/mol for real interactions vs. -8 kcal/mol for permuted controls (P < 1x10⁻¹⁶) [1].	SPLASH + Free Energy Calculation [1]	Identified interactions are specific and energetically favorable.
Structural Plasticity	The RNA-RNA interaction network is broadly similar between closely related strains (e.g., WSN & PR8) but distinct in more distant strains (e.g., Udorn) [1].	SPLASH Comparative Analysis [1]	The network is plastic, allowing for the accommodation of new gene constellations via reassortment.
Impact of NP Binding	vRNA in viral ribonucleoproteins (vRNPs) is less structurally constrained (higher SHAPE reactivity) than naked RNA [1].	SHAPE-MaP in virio vs. ex virio [1]	Nucleoprotein binding remodels RNA structure, but regions of low NP density remain accessible for tRRIs.

These tRRIs are not random; they drive the co-segregation of specific segments during reassortment. For example, a specific kissing-loop interaction between the PB1 and NA segments in the Udorn strain was shown to favor their co-packaging. When this interaction was disrupted, the co-segregation preference was lost, and it was restored with compensatory mutations, providing direct evidence that RNA structure guides reassortment outcomes [1] [2].

Diagram 1: Reassortment in Segmented RNA Viruses

Retroviral DNA Integration and RNA Structure

HIV-1's replication involves a critical DNA intermediate that integrates into the host genome. However, the RNA genome's structure is equally vital, particularly in the 5' untranslated region (UTR) containing the Primer Binding Site (PBS)-segment [7].

Table 3: Experimental Data on HIV-1 Genomic Architecture and Integration

Parameter	Experimental Finding	Method Used	Implication
PBS-Segment Structure	The PBS-segment folds into a thermodynamically stable three-way junction structure [7].	NMR, SAXS, Genetic Mapping [7]	A specific 3D structure orchestrates both early (reverse transcription) and late (translation) replication events.
Host Protein Recruitment	The three-way junction is recognized and bound by host RNA helicase A (RHA/DHX9) [7].	Cofactor Affinity Experiments [7]	Host factors are co-opted to promote reverse transcription processivity and virion infectivity.
vRNA:tRNA Interactions	Extended interactions beyond the PBS, including the A-rich loop:anticodon and PAS:anti-PAS, are critical for efficient replication [7].	Phylogenetics, Mutational Analysis, NMR [7]	Primer selection and reverse transcription initiation are complex processes involving multiple, conserved vRNA:tRNA contacts.
Integration Site Preference	HIV-1 integration tends to occur into transcriptionally active genes affiliated with the nuclear periphery [3].	LM-PCR + NGS [3]	Integration is non-random and influenced by host cellular proteins, impacting viral latency and gene expression.

The PBS-segment serves as a regulatory hub. Its three-way junction structure is recognized by the host protein RHA, which is packaged into virions and boosts infectivity by aiding reverse transcription. Furthermore, this same structural element is involved in a nuclear process that leads to hypermethylation of the viral RNA cap, facilitating specialized translation in the late phase of infection [7].

Diagram 2: HIV-1 Replication and Integration Pathway

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 4: Key Reagents for Genomic Architecture Studies

Reagent / Tool	Function in Research	Application Context
SHAPE Reagents (1M7, NAI)	Chemical probes that react with flexible, single-stranded RNA nucleotides to inform on secondary structure [8] [9].	Probing RNA structure of both IAV vRNA and HIV-1 genomic RNA in various contexts (in virio, in cellulo).
DMS (Dimethyl Sulfate)	Nucleotide-specific probe that methylates unpaired Adenines and Cytosines, also used for structural inference [9].	Complementary probing method, often used alongside SHAPE (e.g., DMS-MaPseq).
Psoralen	A crosslinking agent that intercalates into and covalently crosslinks base-paired RNA duplexes upon UV exposure [1].	Identifying RNA-RNA interactions in techniques like SPLASH.
Reverse Transcriptase (Mutagenic)	Enzyme used in MaP protocols. Mn²⁺ buffer conditions promote misincorporation at chemically modified sites, encoding the structural data [1] [9].	Key step in SHAPE-MaP and DMS-MaPseq for converting chemical modification data into sequencable mutations.
RNA Helicase A (RHA/DHX9)	A host protein identified as a key binding partner for the HIV-1 PBS-segment structure [7].	Target for functional studies on post-transcriptional regulation and virion infectivity in HIV-1.
LTR-Specific Primers	Oligonucleotides designed to bind the conserved Long Terminal Repeat sequences of retroviruses [3].	Essential for the specific amplification and sequencing of retroviral integration sites via LM-PCR.

The fundamental divergence in genomic architecture between segmented RNA viruses and retroviruses dictates their evolutionary trajectories. IAV evolves in a punctuated equilibrium manner, where reassortment during co-infection can lead to sudden, dramatic shifts antigenic shift and pandemic emergence [5] [1]. In contrast, HIV-1 evolves via a more gradual, yet relentless, process of mutation and recombination, fostering extensive genetic diversity within a single host and enabling rapid escape from immune and drug pressure [6].

For therapeutic development, this comparison highlights two strategic fronts:

• Targeting IAV Packaging: Disrupting the specific tRRIs that govern the selective packaging of the eight-segment bundle presents a promising, virus-specific strategy that could be less susceptible to the rapid mutation seen with protein-targeted drugs [2].
• Targeting HIV-1's RNA-Protein Hubs: The essential, structured RNA motifs in HIV-1, such as the PBS-segment's three-way junction and its interaction with host factors like RHA, represent novel, "immutable" therapeutic targets that could be disrupted by small molecules or oligonucleotides to attenuate viral replication [7].

For researchers and drug development professionals, understanding the distinct evolutionary pathways of major viral pathogens is paramount. Influenza virus and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) present two powerful case studies of how genetic variation dictates viral persistence, immune evasion, and therapeutic challenge. While both viruses are characterized by exceptionally high genetic diversity, the underlying mechanisms driving this variation—antigenic drift and shift in influenza versus error-prone reverse transcription and recombination in HIV—are fundamentally different. This guide provides a structured, data-driven comparison of these mechanisms, framing them within a broader thesis on comparative viral phylogenetics. We objectively dissect the molecular processes, present quantitative data in structured tables, detail key experimental protocols, and visualize core concepts to equip scientists with the analytical tools needed for advanced research in virology and immunotherapeutics.

The following diagram illustrates the fundamental processes generating genetic diversity in Influenza and HIV, highlighting the key distinctions in their evolutionary strategies.

Quantitative Comparison of Variation Mechanisms

Table 1: Comparative Quantitative Metrics of Genetic Variation in Influenza and HIV

Parameter	Influenza Virus	HIV-1
Mutation Rate (per site per replication cycle)	~10-5 to 10-4 (error-prone RNA polymerase) [10] [11]	~3 x 10-5 (error-prone reverse transcriptase) [12]
Recombination/Reassortment Mechanism	Genome segment reassortment (Antigenic Shift) [10] [13]	Retroviral recombination (template switching) [13] [12]
Recombination/Reassortment Rate	Frequent; a major driver of pandemic strains [14]	High; rate per nucleotide can exceed mutation rate [13] [12]
Key Enzymes/Proteins Involved	RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) [10]	Reverse Transcriptase (RT), host APOBEC3 enzymes [12]
Primary Evolutionary Driver	Immune selection pressure on surface glycoproteins (HA/NA) [10] [15]	Immune and antiretroviral therapy pressure; continuous within-host evolution [12] [15]
Global Diversity Pattern	Punctuated equilibrium (antigenic clusters) [10]	Continuous, complex quasispecies within a single host [12]
Typical Outcome of Variation	Annual epidemics, occasional pandemics [10]	Chronic, persistent infection; rapid drug resistance [12]

Detailed Experimental Protocols for Studying Variation

Protocol for Tracking Antigenic Drift and Shift in Influenza

Objective: To monitor the antigenic and genetic evolution of influenza viruses to inform vaccine strain selection and understand global spread dynamics [10].

• Step 1: Global Surveillance and Sample Collection. The World Health Organization (WHO) Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System (GISRS) coordinates the collection of respiratory specimens from patients with influenza-like illness from clinical sites worldwide. This process is continuous, ensuring a temporally and geographically representative stream of viral isolates [10].
• Step 2: Viral Sequencing and Genetic Analysis. Viral RNA is extracted from isolates, and the hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) genes are sequenced via Sanger or next-generation sequencing. Phylogenetic trees are constructed from these sequences to visualize the evolutionary relationships between strains and identify emerging genetic clades. The high-resolution phylogenies of HA have a "cactus-like" shape, showing a succession of dominant lineages over time [10] [14].
• Step 3: Antigenic Characterization. The antigenic properties of selected viruses are characterized using the hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay. Ferret antisera raised against reference vaccine viruses are tested for their ability to inhibit hemagglutination by new circulating isolates. Antigenic cartography is then used to create a quantitative, low-dimensional map of antigenic distances between strains, revealing clusters of antigenically similar viruses and the punctuated nature of antigenic drift [10].
• Step 4: Reassortment Detection. To detect reassortment, full-genome sequencing is performed. Phylogenetic trees are inferred for each of the eight genome segments. Incongruences in the phylogenetic placement of a virus across different segment trees provide evidence of reassortment events. Statistical methods can then quantify the frequency of reassortment and its impact on viral evolution [13] [14].

Protocol for Quantifying Mutation and Recombination in HIV

Objective: To measure the in vivo mutation rate and recombination frequency of HIV-1 within an infected host, characterizing the development of the quasispecies [12].

• Step 1: Longitudinal Sample Collection. Peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) and plasma samples are collected from HIV-infected individuals at multiple time points from acute infection through chronic disease. This longitudinal sampling is critical for tracking the evolution of the viral population within a single host [12].
• Step 2: Single-Genome Amplification (SGA). Viral RNA is extracted from plasma, and reverse transcription and polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) are performed under conditions that ensure amplification from a single template molecule (end-point dilution). This method prevents in vitro recombination during amplification, which is crucial for accurate downstream analysis [12].
• Step 3: Direct Sequencing of Amplicons. The amplified DNA fragments from SGA are directly sequenced to determine the exact nucleotide sequence of individual viral genomes. This provides a snapshot of the genetic diversity present in the viral population at a given time, without the averaging effect of bulk sequencing [12].
• Step 4: Computational Analysis of Diversity and Recombination.
  • Mutation Rate Calculation: The sequences are aligned, and a phylogeny is constructed. The number of mutations that have accumulated along phylogenetic branches between time points is counted. Combined with an estimate of the number of replication cycles, this data allows for the calculation of the in vivo mutation rate [12].
  • Recombination Detection: Sequences are screened for evidence of recombination using computational tools such as bootscanning or maximum likelihood methods (e.g., in programs like RDP or GARD). These tools identify sequences that are phylogenetic mosaics, meaning different regions of their genome have distinct evolutionary histories, indicating a past recombination event [13] [12].

Conceptual Workflow for Evolutionary Analysis

The field of phylodynamics provides a unified framework to analyze the intertwined evolutionary and epidemiological dynamics of viruses. The following diagram outlines a generalized workflow for such an analysis, applicable to both influenza and HIV.

Table 2: Essential Research Tools for Studying Viral Genetic Variation

Reagent/Resource	Function/Application	Specific Example/Context
Reference Viral Genomes	Essential baseline for sequence alignment, mutation calling, and phylogenetic analysis.	Los Alamos National Laboratory HIV Database; NCBI Influenza Virus Resource; GISAID EpiFlu database [10] [12].
Viral Polymerases (RT/RdRp)	Direct in vitro study of fidelity and error rates; target for antiviral development.	Purified HIV-1 Reverse Transcriptase for fidelity assays; Influenza RNA-dependent RNA Polymerase complex [11] [12].
Monoclonal Antibodies (mAbs)	To map antigenic sites and measure neutralization sensitivity of viral variants.	Broadly neutralizing antibodies (bNAbs) like VRC01 (for HIV) and FI6v3 (for influenza) used in neutralization assays [15].
APOBEC3 Family Proteins	Study of host-induced hypermutation as a source of viral genetic variation and innate defense.	APOBEC3G is a key host factor that deaminates cytidines in the HIV-1 negative strand, leading to G-to-A mutations [12].
Cell Lines for Co-infection	Essential for in vitro studies of recombination and reassortment.	MDCK cells for influenza; T-cell lines (e.g., MT-4, Jurkat) for HIV; allow controlled co-infection with different strains [13] [14].
Phylodynamic Software	To infer evolutionary history, population dynamics, and selection pressures from genetic data.	BEAST (Bayesian Evolutionary Analysis Sampling Trees) for molecular dating; RDP5 for recombination detection; Latent Antigenic Trees for influenza [10] [16].

The comparative analysis of genetic variation mechanisms in influenza and HIV reveals a core principle in viral evolution: high mutation rates provide the raw material for adaptation, but distinct life-cycle mechanisms sculpt this diversity into profoundly different evolutionary trajectories. Influenza, with its segmented genome, leverages reassortment (shift) for abrupt, pandemic-scale change and antigenic drift for incremental, population-level immune escape. In contrast, HIV, with its diploid genome and reverse transcription lifecycle, employs a relentless combination of error-prone replication and recombination to generate extreme diversity within a single host, facilitating rapid adaptation to immune responses and antiretroviral drugs. For researchers, this dichotomy necessitates distinct therapeutic and preventive strategies—from the annually updated, strain-specific influenza vaccines to the complex drug cocktails and broadly neutralizing antibody approaches required for HIV. Mastering these evolutionary rules is the key to predicting viral behavior and developing the next generation of durable interventions.

The field of viral phylodynamics investigates how epidemiological, immunological, and evolutionary processes act in concert to shape the phylogenetic trees of viruses [17]. For rapidly evolving RNA viruses, ecological and evolutionary dynamics occur on the same timescale, making phylogenetic trees invaluable for understanding transmission patterns, population dynamics, and selective pressures [16]. The tree topology, or branching structure, provides a visual representation of these underlying processes, with distinct patterns emerging for different viruses under varying evolutionary pressures.

Influenza and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) represent two paradigmatic examples of viruses with strikingly different phylogenetic tree shapes. Influenza A/H3N2 viruses typically produce ladder-like phylogenies characterized by sequential replacement of dominant lineages, driven primarily by antigenic drift and host immune pressure [17] [18]. In contrast, HIV often exhibits either star-like phylogenies, indicative of rapid population expansion with multiple contemporaneous lineages, or more balanced trees reflecting different evolutionary dynamics [17] [18]. These topological differences are not merely aesthetic; they encode critical information about fundamental aspects of viral transmission, pathogenesis, and host adaptation that directly impact disease control strategies.

Influenza Phylogenies: The Ladder-like Pattern

Characteristic Topology and Evolutionary Drivers

The ladder-like topology observed in influenza A/H3N2 phylogenies displays a distinctive pectinate or "comb-like" structure, with a single main trunk and short side branches that rarely persist over time (Figure 1A) [18]. This pattern results from strong directional selection exerted by host population immunity, a process termed antigenic drift [17] [19]. As mutations accumulate in the hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) surface proteins, novel variants that escape pre-existing immunity selectively outcompete previously circulating strains, leading to sequential replacement of dominant lineages [20] [19].

The evolutionary dynamics of influenza are further shaped by its global transmission patterns. Research has revealed that influenza A/H3N2 re-emerges annually from a persistent Southeast Asian "source" population, seeding seasonal epidemics in temperate "sink" regions [16]. This global migration, combined with strong antigenic selection, generates rapid antigenic evolution and corresponding high rates of amino acid change at HA antigenic sites [16]. The result is a phylogeny with long external branches and short internal branches, reflecting the continuous selective sweeps that purge genetic diversity [17].

Experimental Evidence and Methodological Approaches

Recent research has leveraged these phylogenetic principles to develop predictive models for influenza vaccine selection. One study extracted topological features from HA and NA phylogenetic trees of H3N2 influenza viruses, then applied support vector machine classifiers to predict future circulating strains [20]. The approach achieved accuracies of 0.75 to 0.89 (AUC 0.83 to 0.91) over the 2016-2020 seasons, demonstrating that phylogenetic topology contains meaningful predictive signal for evolutionary trajectories [20].

The experimental workflow for such analyses typically involves: (1) compiling comprehensive sequence datasets from platforms like GISAID; (2) multiple sequence alignment using tools like MAFFT; (3) phylogenetic reconstruction with maximum likelihood methods in IQ-TREE; (4) phylogenetic dating to convert trees to time-scaled phylogenies; and (5) topological feature extraction from ancestral subtrees for downstream analysis [20] [21]. These methods allow researchers to quantify the ladder-like structure and relate it to viral fitness and future spread.

HIV Phylogenies: Star-like and Balanced Patterns

Characteristic Topologies and Evolutionary Drivers

HIV phylogenies exhibit two primary topological patterns: star-like trees with multiple lineages emerging from a common ancestor, and more balanced trees with deeper branching structures (Figure 1B) [17] [18]. Star-like phylogenies, characterized by long external branches relative to internal branches, reflect rapid epidemic expansion where multiple lineages diversify simultaneously from a small founding population [17]. This pattern emerges from the exceptionally high evolutionary rate of HIV, driven by its error-prone reverse transcriptase and rapid within-host replication generating billions of new virions daily [19].

The balanced trees observed in HIV reflect different evolutionary dynamics. Unlike influenza, HIV experiences diversifying selection across multiple genomic regions and can establish chronic, persistent infections within hosts [17] [18]. This allows for longer-term coexistence of diverse lineages and more complex branching patterns. Additionally, while HIV's envelope protein exhibits balanced trees between hosts, it often shows ladder-like topologies within chronically infected individuals, highlighting how phylogenetic patterns can shift across biological scales [17].

Experimental Evidence and Methodological Approaches

HIV phylogenetic studies frequently employ ancestral-state reconstruction methods to infer transmission directions between linked individuals. A comprehensive analysis of 112 known HIV transmission pairs found that phylogenetic topology critically determines inference accuracy [22]. Specifically, paraphyletic-monophyletic topologies (where all sequences from one partner form a cluster within the other's diversity) yielded 93% accuracy in direction identification, while other topologies showed substantially lower performance [22].

Methodologically, HIV phylogenetic analysis typically involves: (1) sampling multiple viral sequences per individual; (2) alignment with MAFFT; (3) maximum likelihood tree reconstruction with IQ-TREE using appropriate nucleotide substitution models; (4) ancestral-state reconstruction using joint estimation procedures; and (5) statistical evaluation of factors influencing inference accuracy [22]. These approaches have revealed that differences in intrahost viral diversity and sampling timing significantly impact topological accuracy for transmission direction inference [22].

Comparative Analysis: Quantitative Differences

Table 1: Comparative Features of Influenza and HIV Phylogenetic Tree Topologies

Characteristic	Influenza (Ladder-like)	HIV (Star-like/Balanced)
Primary Topology	Pectinate/comb-like with single main trunk	Star-like with multiple emergent lineages or balanced
Branch Length Distribution	Long external branches, short internal branches	Long external relative to internal (star-like) or more uniform (balanced)
Evolutionary Rate	High (∼1-3 × 10⁻³ substitutions/site/year)	Very high (∼2-5 × 10⁻³ substitutions/site/year)
Dominant Selection Pressure	Directional selection (immune escape)	Diversifying selection and neutral evolution
Epidemiological Driver	Seasonal epidemics, global migration	Persistent transmission within and between hosts
Infection Duration	Acute (days-weeks)	Chronic (years-lifetime)
Within-host Dynamics	Limited diversity accumulation	Extensive diversity and subpopulation maintenance

Table 2: Methodological Approaches for Topological Analysis

Analysis Type	Influenza Applications	HIV Applications
Tree Reconstruction	Maximum likelihood (IQ-TREE) with time-scaled phylogenies	Maximum likelihood (IQ-TREE) with complex substitution models
Topological Metrics	Sackin index, tree shape statistics	Kernel methods, tree balance statistics
Selection Analysis	dN/dS ratios, epitope site identification	dN/dS ratios, recombination detection
Specialized Tools	Augur pipeline, nextflu	Phylodynamic modeling, ancestral-state reconstruction
Key Software	IQ-TREE, TreeTime, MAFFT	IQ-TREE, BEAST, PhyML, MAFFT

Research Reagents and Computational Tools

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Computational Tools

Item	Function/Application	Example Use
GISAID Database	Repository of influenza virus sequences	Source of HA and NA sequences for phylogenetic reconstruction [20]
IQ-TREE	Maximum likelihood phylogenetic analysis	Reconstruction of timed trees for topological feature extraction [20] [21]
MAFFT	Multiple sequence alignment	Alignment of viral sequences prior to tree building [22] [21]
ModelFinder	Nucleotide substitution model selection	Identifying best-fit evolutionary model for accurate tree reconstruction [22] [21]
TreeTime	Phylogenetic dating and ancestral reconstruction	Converting phylogenetic trees to time-scaled phylogenies [20]
LASSO Regression	Statistical model selection and regularization	Identifying factors influencing phylogenetic inference accuracy [22]
PhyCLIP	Phylogenetic clustering tool	Defining lineages and clades in large sequence datasets [21]
Support Vector Machines	Machine learning classification	Predicting future circulating strains from phylogenetic features [20]

Visualization of Phylogenetic Tree Topologies

Research Implications and Applications

The distinct phylogenetic topologies of influenza and HIV have profound implications for disease control strategies. For influenza, the ladder-like topology informs vaccine strain selection approaches, as researchers can prioritize strains located on the main phylogenetic trunk that are likely to seed future populations [20]. The predictability of antigenic drift enables the development of seasonal vaccines, though the ongoing evolution necessitates continuous surveillance and periodic updates to vaccine formulations [19].

For HIV, the star-like and balanced topologies present different challenges and opportunities. The high evolutionary rate and extensive genetic diversity complicate vaccine development, as the virus rapidly escapes immune recognition [19]. However, phylogenetic approaches can reveal transmission networks and patterns of viral spread, informing targeted public health interventions [22] [16]. Additionally, analysis of within-host HIV phylogenies provides insights into disease progression and the evolution of drug resistance, with implications for clinical management [17].

Methodologically, the comparison highlights the importance of tailored analytical approaches for different viral systems. While tree balance statistics like the Sackin index provide some insights, newer approaches like kernel methods that map complex tree shapes into feature spaces have shown superior performance in classifying phylogenies and extracting meaningful biological signals [18]. These computational advances, combined with growing genomic datasets, continue to enhance our understanding of how evolutionary processes shape viral phylogenies across biological scales.

Impact of Evolutionary Rates on Genetic Diversity and Quasispecies Formation

The evolutionary dynamics of viruses such as Influenza and HIV present a formidable challenge to global public health, driving the need for continuous vaccine updates and therapeutic strategies. These viruses exhibit extraordinary genetic diversity and form complex quasispecies populations, which are direct consequences of their high evolutionary rates [23] [24]. This review provides a comparative analysis of the evolutionary mechanisms, genetic diversity patterns, and quasispecies formation of Influenza and HIV-1. By synthesizing quantitative data on their mutation rates, evolutionary trajectories, and population structures, and by detailing the experimental methodologies that underpin these findings, this guide aims to equip researchers and drug development professionals with a foundational understanding essential for designing effective countermeasures.

Quasispecies theory describes viral populations as dynamic, complex swarms of genetically distinct but closely related variants, rather than a collection of static, identical genomes [25] [24]. This population structure, characterized by mutational coupling between variants, means that the fitness of any individual genotype is influenced by its network of connected mutants. For RNA viruses, the unit of selection is often the quasispecies as a whole, which has profound implications for pathogenesis, drug resistance, and vaccine design [24].

Comparative Evolutionary Mechanisms and Outcomes

The evolutionary paths of Influenza and HIV are shaped by distinct molecular mechanisms and host interactions, leading to different patterns of global diversity and adaptation. The core quantitative differences that underpin their evolution are summarized in the table below.

Table 1: Comparative Evolutionary Dynamics of Influenza and HIV-1

Feature	Influenza Virus	HIV-1
Mutation Rate	~1.3×10⁻³ to 3.7×10⁻³ nucleotides per site per year [26]	~10⁻⁵ mutations per base per replication cycle [27]
Global Diversity Pattern	Dominated by one or a few genotypes per subtype (e.g., H1N1, H3N2) [28]	Multiple co-circulating groups and subtypes (e.g., A, B, C, CRFs) [29]
Primary Driver of Diversity	Antigenic drift; reassortment of genomic segments [23] [30]	High mutation rate and frequent recombination [27]
Quasispecies Role in Disease	Enables seasonal escape from herd immunity [23]	Facilitates rapid escape from host immune response and ART [31] [24]
Key Evolutionary Model	Site-based dynamics of mutations (e.g., beth-1) [30]	Quasispecies model in a complex fitness landscape [25]

Influenza Virus: Antigenic Drift and Phylodynamic Patterns

Influenza virus evolution is characterized by antigenic drift, where accumulated point mutations, particularly in the hemagglutinin (HA) and neuramidinas (NA) genes, allow the virus to escape population immunity [23] [30]. This results in a single-lineage evolution for the A/H3N2 subtype, with global circulation and replacement of dominant strains [26]. The genetic diversity within a single epidemic season is often limited, without strong evidence of clonal expansion of mutants, and shows spatial correlation in genetic distances [26]. A study of a single French epidemic season found an average nucleotide diversity of 3.4×10⁻³ per site within the HA1 domain, with viruses segregating into two distinct phylogenetic groups but no clear temporal pattern within the season [26].

Long-term evolution is marked by reassortment, where co-infecting viruses exchange genomic segments. This creates new variants with combined genetic backgrounds, contributing to pandemic emergence [23]. Recent research has identified three distinct genetic diversity patterns for Influenza A viruses: one-genotype domination (e.g., seasonal H1N1, H3N2), multi-genotype co-circulation (e.g., many avian influenzas), and hybrid-circulation (e.g., H7N9) [28]. The dominance of one genotype in human-adapted seasonal flu is likely due to low transmission restrictions and rapid global spread, which outcompetes regional variants [28].

HIV-1: Mutation, Recombination, and Within-Host Diversity

HIV-1 exhibits extraordinary genetic diversity, driven by an error-prone reverse transcriptase and a replication cycle that generates ~10⁻⁵ mutations per base per replication [27]. This high mutation rate, combined with frequent recombination, allows HIV to explore a vast sequence space, facilitating rapid adaptation to host immune responses and antiretroviral therapy (ART) [27]. The virus exists as a quasispecies within a single host, constituting a swarm of genetically distinct variants [24].

This diversity manifests on a global scale with multiple distinct lineages, including HIV-1 Groups M, N, O, and P, resulting from independent cross-species transmissions from chimpanzees and gorillas [27]. Group M, responsible for the pandemic, is further divided into subtypes (A-D, F-H, J, L) and numerous circulating recombinant forms (CRFs) [29]. Subtype C is dominant in Southern Africa and India, while subtype B prevails in North America and Europe, reflecting founder effects and established transmission networks [29] [27]. This heterogeneity impacts diagnostics, treatment efficacy, and vaccine design, as subtypes can differ in transmission efficiency, disease progression, and drug resistance profiles [27].

Experimental Methodologies for Evolutionary Analysis

Understanding viral evolution relies on specific experimental and computational protocols to sequence genomes, infer phylogenetic relationships, and model population dynamics.

Protocol 1: Genomic Sequencing and Phylodynamic Analysis

This protocol is fundamental for tracking viral evolution at the population level, applicable to both Influenza and HIV.

• Objective: To determine the genetic diversity, evolutionary rate, and spatiotemporal spread of a virus.
• Detailed Workflow:
  • Sample Collection & RNA Extraction: Collect viral isolates (e.g., nasal swabs for Influenza, blood plasma for HIV). Extract genomic RNA using commercial kits (e.g., QIAamp RNA mini kit) [26].
  • PCR Amplification & Sequencing: Amplify target genes (e.g., HA1 for Influenza, pol or env for HIV) via RT-PCR and nested PCR with gene-specific primers. Purify products and perform sequencing using the fluorescent dideoxy-terminator method on an automated DNA sequencer [26].
  • Sequence Alignment & Phylogenetics: Aline sequences using software like ClustalW. Construct phylogenetic trees with methods like Neighbor-Joining (e.g., using PHYLIP software) and assess node confidence with bootstrapping (e.g., 100 replicates) [26].
  • Evolutionary Rate Calculation: Calculate the average number of nucleotide substitutions per site per year (molecular clock analysis) using models in software like BEAST [23].
  • Phylogeographic Analysis: Incorporate geographic data to infer viral migration patterns between regions [23].
• Key Application: This approach revealed the global circulation pattern of seasonal H3N2 Influenza, showing its origin in East and Southeast Asia and subsequent spread to other continents [23]. It is also used to trace the origin of the HIV-1 pandemic to Central Africa in the early 20th century [27].

Protocol 2: Long-Term Experimental Evolution

This protocol directly observes viral adaptation and quasispecies dynamics under controlled conditions.

• Objective: To quantify the contributions of environment and mutational history to viral evolutionary paths and to identify evidence of parallel evolution.
• Detailed Workflow:
  • Establishment of Evolutionary Lines: Initiate multiple independent replicate lines of a viral clone (e.g., HIV-1 NL4-3) [32].
  • Serial Passaging: Culture each line over hundreds of passages in a specific environment (e.g., on different human T-cell lines like MT-2 and MT-4). For derived lines, switch the cell type after a set number of passages to study the impact of environmental change [32].
  • Time-Series Sampling & Sequencing: Regularly sample viral populations from each line throughout the experiment. Use next-generation sequencing to determine the frequency of mutations over time [32].
  • Fitness Assays: Compete evolved viral populations against the ancestral strain to measure relative fitness gains in specific environments [32].
  • Data Analysis: Identify shared (parallel) mutations across independent lines. Compare evolutionary paths between constant and switched environments to quantify the effects of history and environment. Use neutral simulations to test if observed evolution deviates from neutrality [32].
• Key Application: A long-term HIV-1 evolution experiment revealed extensive parallel evolution, with 41% of mutations being shared across independent lines, indicating a high degree of predictability and strong selective pressures even in a constant environment [32].

Protocol 3: Quasispecies Modeling and the Error Threshold

This protocol uses mathematical models to understand the population dynamics of quasispecies and explore therapeutic interventions.

• Objective: To model the behavior of viral quasispecies and investigate mutation-based antiviral strategies like lethal mutagenesis.
• Detailed Workflow:
  • Model Formulation: Apply the quasispecies equation system, which describes the change in frequency of mutant i over time: dx_i/dt = Σ_j x_j f_j Q_ji - Φ(x) x_i, where x_i is the frequency of sequence i, f_j is the fitness of sequence j, Q_ji is the mutation probability from j to i, and Φ(x) is the average population fitness that keeps the total population constant [25].
  • Parameterization: Define a fitness landscape, often simplified to a "single-peak" landscape where a master sequence has high fitness (f_0) and all mutants have a lower fitness (f_1). Set the mutation rate (μ) [25].
  • Error Threshold Calculation: Using the two-variable model (master sequence x_0 and average mutant x_1), calculate the critical mutation rate, or error threshold: μ_c = 1 - f_1/f_0. Beyond this threshold, the master sequence cannot be maintained and genetic information is lost [25].
  • Therapeutic Testing: Simulate the impact of mutagenic drugs by increasing the model's mutation rate (μ). Determine if pushing the viral population beyond its error threshold is a viable strategy [24].
• Key Application: The model demonstrates that RNA viruses operate near their error threshold. This provides the theoretical basis for developing mutagenic drugs like ribavirin, which can push viral populations into error catastrophe, leading to a lethal accumulation of mutations [24].

The following diagram illustrates the core conceptual workflow of quasispecies modeling and its connection to therapeutic intervention.

Diagram 1: Quasispecies Model and Error Catastrophe Workflow

Table 2: Key Research Reagents and Computational Tools for Viral Evolution Studies

Tool Name	Type	Primary Function	Application Example
QIAamp RNA Mini Kit	Laboratory Reagent	Purification of viral RNA from clinical samples	RNA extraction from nasal swabs or plasma for sequencing [26]
BigDye Terminator Kit	Laboratory Reagent	Fluorescent dideoxy-terminator cycle sequencing	Generating sequence data from PCR-amplified viral genes [26]
ClustalW / PHYLIP	Software	Multiple sequence alignment and phylogenetic tree construction	Inferring evolutionary relationships between viral sequences [26]
BEAST	Software	Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees	Estimating evolutionary rates and divergence times (molecular clock dating) [23]
beth-1	Computational Model	Site-based dynamic model to forecast mutation fitness and select vaccine strains	Predicting future dominant influenza strains for vaccine formulation [30]
FluTyping	Computational Tool	Identifies influenza virus genotypes using whole-genome data	Classifying IAVs into genetic diversity patterns (e.g., one-genotype domination) [28]
GISAID Database	Online Database	Archiving and sharing influenza virus genetic sequences	Source of global sequence data for evolutionary analysis and surveillance [30]
MT-2 / MT-4 Cell Lines	Biological Reagent	Human T-cell lines for culturing HIV-1	Used as environment for long-term experimental evolution of HIV-1 [32]

Zoonotic Origins and Cross-Species Transmission Events in Viral Emergence

Viral emergence from animal reservoirs represents a significant threat to global public health, with influenza and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) serving as paradigm examples of successful cross-species transmission. This review systematically compares the evolutionary pathways and transmission dynamics of these phylogenetically distinct viruses, highlighting how their different evolutionary mechanisms—antigenic drift and shift in influenza versus rapid mutation and recombination in HIV—shape their emergence and spread in human populations. By examining quantitative genetic data, transmission patterns, and research methodologies, we provide a comparative framework for understanding the fundamental processes governing viral cross-species transmission and adaptation, with implications for pandemic preparedness and therapeutic development.

Zoonotic transmission, wherein pathogens jump from animal hosts to humans, constitutes the origin of most emerging infectious diseases [33]. The process involves complex interactions at the animal-human-environment interface, with successful emergence requiring a pathogen to overcome a series of barriers: initial infection of a new host, adaptation to enable efficient replication, and subsequent sustained transmission within the new host population [33]. Both influenza viruses and HIV exemplify this process, though their evolutionary trajectories and transmission dynamics differ substantially due to their distinct biological properties and evolutionary mechanisms.

Influenza A viruses originate from aquatic bird reservoirs and have repeatedly crossed species barriers to infect humans and other mammals [34]. In contrast, HIV represents a classic example of primate-to-human transmission, with HIV-1 originating from simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIVs) infecting chimpanzees [33]. Understanding the comparative evolutionary biology of these viruses provides critical insights into the mechanisms of viral emergence and informs strategies for detection, control, and prevention of future zoonotic threats.

Comparative Origins and Reservoir Hosts

Influenza A Virus Reservoirs and Transmission

Influenza A viruses demonstrate a broad host range with aquatic birds of the orders Anseriformes (ducks) and Charadriiformes (shorebirds, gulls) serving as primary reservoirs [34]. These wild bird species harbor tremendous viral diversity, encompassing 16 hemagglutinin (HA) and 9 neuraminidase (NA) subtypes, and typically experience asymptomatic infections, facilitating widespread viral maintenance and dispersal [34]. From this reservoir, influenza viruses occasionally jump to poultry or various mammalian species, including humans, resulting in sporadic infections, epidemics, or pandemics [34].

Recent metagenomic sequencing has revealed an even more complex ecology of influenza viruses, with highly divergent viruses identified in fruit bats in Central and South America, representing unique subtypes (H17N10 and H18N11) with significant genetic divergence from avian strains [34]. Furthermore, influenza-like viruses have been detected in amphibians and fish, suggesting an evolutionary history spanning the entire history of vertebrates [34]. The migratory patterns of birds facilitate long-distance viral transport, creating a continuously shifting landscape of viral distribution and emergence opportunities [33].

HIV Origins and Primate Reservoirs

HIV emerged in human populations through cross-species transmission of simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIVs) from non-human primates [33] [35]. HIV-1, responsible for the global pandemic, originated from SIVcpz in chimpanzees, while HIV-2 derived from SIVsmm in sooty mangabeys [35]. Phylogenetic evidence indicates that these cross-species transmission events occurred multiple times throughout the 20th century, with the most recent common ancestor of HIV-1 group M (the pandemic strain) dating to approximately the 1920s in Kinshasa [35].

The ecological separation between SIV-infected primates in central African jungles and human populations historically limited spillover events to single infections or small, isolated clusters [33]. The eventual emergence of pandemic HIV required not only genetic adaptations for human-to-human transmission but also facilitating changes in human behavior, travel patterns, and population density to sustain chains of transmission [33]. Unlike influenza, which has a broad host range, HIV/SIV viruses demonstrate host specificity, with different strains adapted to particular primate species.

Table 1: Comparative Origins of Influenza and HIV

Characteristic	Influenza Virus	HIV
Primary Reservoir	Aquatic birds (Anseriformes, Charadriiformes)	Non-human primates (chimpanzees, sooty mangabeys)
Intermediate Hosts	Poultry, swine, horses, dogs	None identified (direct primate-human transmission)
Genetic Diversity in Reservoir	16 HA and 9 NA subtypes	Multiple SIV strains with host species specificity
Initial Cross-Species Transmission	Frequent, multiple species	Rare, primate-human only
Key Emergence Timing	Seasonal epidemics, periodic pandemics	Early 20th century (pandemic HIV)

Molecular Mechanisms of Cross-Species Transmission

Viral Entry and Host Range Determinants

Cross-species transmission requires viruses to overcome fundamental host range barriers, including cell entry compatibility, intracellular replication constraints, and evasion of host immune responses [33]. For influenza viruses, the primary determinant of host range is the hemagglutinin protein, which binds to sialic acid receptors on host cells. Avian influenza viruses preferentially recognize sialic acids with α2,3 linkages, predominantly found in the avian intestinal tract and human lower respiratory tract, while human-adapted viruses recognize α2,6 linkages prevalent in the human upper respiratory tract [33]. Mutations that alter receptor binding specificity are therefore critical for cross-species transmission and adaptation to human hosts.

For HIV/SIV viruses, cross-species transmission involves interactions between the viral envelope glycoprotein and host cell receptors (CD4, CCR5, or CXCR4) [35]. The specificity of these interactions represents a major barrier to cross-species transmission, though some SIV strains can utilize human receptors with sufficient efficiency to initiate infection. Following transmission, adaptive mutations in the envelope gene frequently occur, enhancing receptor binding affinity or efficiency in the new host species [35].

Mechanisms of Genetic Variation and Adaptation

Influenza viruses and HIV employ distinct strategies to generate genetic diversity, facilitating host adaptation:

Influenza Virus Genetic Variation:

• Antigenic drift: Accumulation of point mutations in surface proteins (HA and NA) due to error-prone replication
• Antigenic shift: Reassortment of genomic segments when two different viruses co-infect a single cell
• Segment reassortment: Generates novel viral genotypes with pandemic potential by combining genes from different sources [34]

HIV Genetic Variation:

• Error-prone reverse transcriptase: Lacks proofreading function, resulting in high mutation rates [35]
• Recombination: Occurs when two different viral genomes co-infect a cell and exchange genetic material during reverse transcription [35]
• Rapid replication: Short generation times and high viral loads accelerate diversification [35]

Table 2: Molecular Mechanisms of Genetic Variation and Adaptation

Mechanism	Influenza Virus	HIV
Mutation Rate	~10⁻³ substitutions/site/year [34]	4.1 × 10⁻³ substitutions/site/year (whole genome) [35]
Key Enzymes	RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (error-prone)	Reverse transcriptase (error-prone, no proofreading) [35]
Recombination	Segment reassortment (antigenic shift)	Template switching during reverse transcription [35]
Hypervariable Regions	HA1 domain of hemagglutinin	V3 loop of envelope glycoprotein [35]
Selection Pressure	Immune escape (antibody-driven)	Immune escape (CTL and antibody-driven) [35]

Phylodynamic Patterns and Evolutionary Trajectories

Phylogenetic Patterns and Population Dynamics

Viral phylodynamics—the study of how epidemiological, immunological, and evolutionary processes shape viral phylogenies—reveals distinctive patterns for influenza and HIV [17]. These patterns reflect differences in transmission dynamics, selection pressures, and host population structures:

Influenza Virus Phylogenetic Characteristics:

• Ladder-like phylogenies: Exhibited by influenza A/H3N2 hemagglutinin, bearing hallmarks of strong directional selection driven by immune escape [17]
• Seasonal structure: Antigenic evolution follows a seasonal pattern with limited spatial structure over extended periods [17]
• Selective sweeps: New antigenic variants rapidly replace existing diversity, creating star-like trees with long external branches [17]

HIV Phylogenetic Characteristics:

• Star-like phylogenies: Reflecting rapid population expansion during epidemic spread [17]
• Distinct cluster patterns: Revealing transmission networks and host population structure [17]
• Within-host vs between-host differences: Within-host HIV phylogenies resemble influenza's ladder-like tree due to immune pressure, while between-host trees are more balanced [17]

The contrasting phylodynamic patterns of these viruses are visualized in the following diagram:

Diagram 1: Comparative Phylodynamic Patterns of Influenza and HIV. Influenza exhibits a ladder-like phylogeny with sequential variant replacement, while HIV shows a star-like phylogeny reflecting rapid expansion.

Evolutionary Rates and Selective Pressures

Comparative analysis of evolutionary rates reveals fundamental differences in how influenza and HIV evolve:

Influenza Evolutionary Dynamics:

• Non-uniform evolution: Evolutionary rates vary across genomic segments, with surface proteins (HA and NA) evolving faster than internal proteins [34]
• Episodic evolution: Periods of stasis interrupted by rapid antigenic change, often associated with amino acid substitutions in antigenic sites [30]
• Clade succession: Predominant clades are typically replaced every 2-5 years due to immune-driven selection [30]

HIV Evolutionary Dynamics:

• Consistently high mutation rate: HIV exhibits the highest recorded biological mutation rate known to science [35]
• Differential selection pressure: The envelope gene experiences stronger positive selection than other genomic regions [35]
• Within-host evolution: HIV diversification within a single infected individual can be extensive due to prolonged clinical latency and large population sizes [35]

Table 3: Quantitative Evolutionary Parameters

Evolutionary Parameter	Influenza Virus	HIV
Substitution Rate (genome-wide)	~10⁻³ substitutions/site/year [34]	4.1 × 10⁻³ substitutions/site/year [35]
Hypervariable Region Rate	Varies by site and region	Up to 5.2 × 10⁻³ in envelope V3 loop [35]
dN/dS Ratio (selection)	High in antigenic sites (positive selection)	Varies by gene; highest in envelope [35]
Impact of Immune Pressure	Seasonal vaccine escape	CTL and antibody escape mutations [35]
Impact of Antiviral Therapy	Emergence of neuraminidase inhibitor resistance	Rapid emergence of ART resistance mutations [35]

Research Methodologies and Experimental Approaches

Genomic Surveillance and Sequencing Technologies

Advancements in sequencing technologies have revolutionized our understanding of both influenza and HIV evolution:

Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) Applications:

• Influenza surveillance: Enables rapid, high-throughput sequencing of entire influenza genomes from clinical specimens, facilitating real-time tracking of emerging variants [30]
• HIV quasispecies analysis: Deep sequencing approaches can detect ultra-rare mutations at frequencies as low as 0.2%, revealing complex viral populations within hosts [35]
• Metagenomic sequencing: Has revealed previously unrecognized influenza virus diversity in bats, fish, and other vertebrate species [34]

Bayesian Phylogenetic Methods:

• Molecular clock dating: Allows estimation of substitution rates and times of most recent common ancestors [35] [17]
• Phylogeographic reconstruction: Enables tracking of viral spread through space and time [35]
• Demographic reconstruction: Infers changes in effective population size over time [17]

Predictive Modeling and Vaccine Strain Selection

For influenza, predictive evolutionary modeling has become an essential component of vaccine strain selection. The beth-1 computational approach models site-wise mutation fitness informed by viral genomic data and population sero-positivity [30]. This method:

• Calibrates transition times of mutations (the duration for a mutation to emerge until it reaches an influential frequency)
• Projects future fitness landscapes based on mutation dynamics
• Selects optimal vaccine strains by minimizing weighted genetic distance to projected future consensus strains [30]

In retrospective analyses, beth-1 demonstrated superior genetic matching compared to existing approaches, with significantly fewer amino acid mismatches on both HA and NA proteins [30].

For HIV, vaccine development faces greater challenges due to:

• Extensive genetic diversity: Particularly in envelope glycoproteins
• Rapid immune escape: CTL and antibody escape mutations accumulate quickly
• Structural constraints: Conserved epitopes are often poorly immunogenic

The following diagram illustrates the workflow for predictive evolutionary modeling of influenza viruses:

Diagram 2: Predictive Evolutionary Modeling Workflow for Influenza Vaccine Strain Selection

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Methods

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents and Methods for Viral Evolution Studies

Reagent/Method	Application	Function in Research
Next-Generation Sequencing Platforms	Genomic surveillance of influenza and HIV	Enables high-throughput, cost-effective analysis of viral quasispecies and detection of rare variants [35]
Bayesian Phylogenetic Software (BEAST, MrBayes)	Evolutionary analysis and molecular dating	Infers evolutionary parameters, population dynamics, and historical spread from time-stamped sequence data [35] [17]
Pseudovirus Neutralization Assays	Vaccine evaluation and antibody characterization	Measures neutralizing antibody responses against viral envelope proteins without requiring high containment [30]
Hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) Assays	Influenza antigenic characterization	Maps antigenic relationships between influenza strains to inform vaccine strain selection [30]
Single-Genome Amplification	HIV envelope analysis	Amplifies individual viral genomes to accurately represent within-host diversity without recombination artifacts [35]
Antigenic Cartography	Influenza surveillance	Visualizes and quantifies antigenic differences between influenza variants using HAI data [30]
Deep Mutational Scanning	Epitope mapping and escape variant identification	Comprehensively assesses the functional impact of mutations across viral proteins [30]

The comparative analysis of influenza and HIV reveals how fundamentally different evolutionary strategies can lead to successful emergence and sustained transmission in human populations. Influenza employs antigenic drift and shift to continuously generate diversity, enabling it to cause recurrent seasonal epidemics and periodic pandemics. In contrast, HIV utilizes extremely high mutation rates and recombination to rapidly diversify within hosts, facilitating immune evasion and establishing persistent infections.

From a public health perspective, these differences necessitate distinct control strategies. Influenza's predictable seasonal patterns and slower within-host evolution make annual vaccine updates an effective strategy, though requiring continuous global surveillance and predictive modeling [30]. HIV's rapid evolution and integration into the host genome have complicated vaccine development, making antiretroviral therapy the cornerstone of control efforts, with treatment also serving as prevention [35].

Future research directions should focus on:

• Integration of multi-scale data: Combining within-host evolutionary dynamics with population-level transmission patterns
• Predictive model refinement: Incorporating additional parameters such as host immunity landscapes and environmental factors
• Universal vaccine development: Targeting conserved epitopes to overcome the challenges of viral diversity
• One Health approaches: Recognizing the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health in disease emergence [36]

Understanding the comparative evolution of influenza and HIV provides not only insights into these specific pathogens but also a conceptual framework for anticipating and responding to future emerging viral threats. As climate change, habitat destruction, and global travel continue to increase human-wildlife interactions [36], the lessons learned from these two viruses will become increasingly valuable for pandemic preparedness and response.

From Sequence to Strategy: Phylodynamic Models and AI in Surveillance and Intervention

Phylodynamics as a Bridge Between Genetic Sequences and Epidemiological Processes

Phylodynamics has emerged as a critical interdisciplinary framework that quantifies how epidemiological, immunological, and evolutionary processes interact to shape viral phylogenies. This approach leverages genetic sequence data to infer key epidemiological parameters and transmission dynamics that are often difficult to assess through traditional surveillance alone. Using a comparative analysis of influenza and HIV as model systems, this review demonstrates how phylodynamic methods reveal fundamental differences in evolutionary tempo, selective pressures, and population dynamics between these phylogenetically distinct viruses. We synthesize experimental protocols, visualization methodologies, and reagent solutions that enable researchers to translate genetic sequences into actionable epidemiological insights for drug development and public health intervention.

Phylodynamics is defined as the study of how epidemiological, immunological, and evolutionary processes act and potentially interact to shape viral phylogenies [17]. Since the term was coined in 2004, research in this field has focused primarily on viral transmission dynamics at multiple scales: within cells of an infected host, between individual hosts within a population, and across entire host populations [17]. The fundamental premise underlying phylodynamic approaches is that rapidly evolving viruses, particularly RNA viruses, accumulate genetic variation on the same timescale as their ecological spread, meaning that epidemiological processes leave recognizable signatures in the genetic sequences of pathogen populations [37].

The field represents a "melding of immunodynamics, epidemiology, and evolutionary biology" required to analyze the interacting evolutionary and ecological processes of rapidly evolving pathogens [37]. For viruses like influenza and HIV, high mutation rates and short generation times mean that neutral genetic variation effectively tracks population dynamics, allowing past ecological events to be reconstructed through phylogenetic analysis [17]. However, phylodynamics goes beyond simply tracking population changes to address the inevitable interaction of evolutionary and ecological processes, such as how novel mutations affecting immune evasion or drug resistance subsequently alter transmission dynamics [37].

Table 1: Key Phylodynamic Concepts and Their Epidemiological Interpretations

Phylogenetic Pattern	Epidemiological Interpretation	Viral Example
Star-like tree (long external branches relative to internal branches)	Rapid population expansion	HIV during initial epidemic spread [17]
Ladder-like tree	Strong directional selection (e.g., immune escape)	Influenza A/H3N2 hemagglutinin [17]
Strong spatial clustering	Limited transmission between host subpopulations	Measles and rabies viruses [17]
Paraphyletic-monophyletic (PM) donor-recipient relationship	Direct transmission with single variant bottleneck	HIV transmission pairs [38]
Paraphyletic-polyphyletic (PP) donor-recipient relationship	Direct transmission with multiple variants	Mother-to-child HIV transmission [38]

Comparative Evolutionary Dynamics: Influenza vs. HIV

Evolutionary Rates and Population Dynamics

Influenza and HIV exhibit fundamentally different evolutionary patterns driven by distinct selective pressures and transmission dynamics. Influenza A/H3N2 shows a characteristic ladder-like phylogeny in its hemagglutinin gene, bearing the hallmarks of strong directional selection driven primarily by immune escape [17]. This pattern reflects the constant antigenic drift that allows the virus to evade population immunity, with selective pressures favoring new variants that can overcome host immune recognition [39]. The phylogeny of human influenza does not typically exhibit strong spatial structure over extended periods, suggesting frequent global mixing and redistribution [17].

In contrast, HIV phylogenies often display a more balanced structure at the between-host level, though they can exhibit star-like topologies during periods of rapid epidemic expansion [17]. Interestingly, phylogenies of HIV's envelope protein from chronically infected hosts resemble influenza's ladder-like tree, highlighting that the processes affecting viral genetic variation can differ substantially across scales [17]. At the transmission pair level, HIV exhibits predominantly paraphyletic-monophyletic (PM) or paraphyletic-polyphyletic (PP) phylogenetic relationships, reflecting transmission of single or multiple genetic variants respectively [38].

Table 2: Comparative Evolutionary Profiles of Influenza and HIV

Evolutionary Characteristic	Influenza Virus	HIV
Evolutionary Rate	~10⁻³ substitutions/site/year [34]	~10⁻³ substitutions/site/year [38]
Dominant Selective Pressure	Immune escape (antigenic drift) [39]	Immune escape and drug resistance [40]
Characteristic Tree Shape	Ladder-like (between hosts) [17]	Balanced between hosts; star-like during expansion [17]
Effect of Population Expansion	Star-like tree with long external branches [17]	Star-like tree with long external branches [17]
Within-host Diversity	Lower relative to between-host [41]	High, forming complex variant clouds [38]
Primary Evolutionary Mechanism	Reassortment and point mutations [39]	Point mutations and recombination [38]

Antigenic Evolution and Immune Escape

The antigenic evolution of influenza viruses occurs primarily through two mechanisms: antigenic drift, which involves the gradual accumulation of mutations in surface proteins; and antigenic shift, which involves reassortment of gene segments when multiple strains co-infect a single host [39]. Antigenic drift enables seasonal epidemics, while antigenic shift can lead to pandemics when novel subtypes emerge. The hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) proteins are the primary targets of neutralizing antibodies and thus experience the strongest selective pressure for change [42]. The tempo of influenza's antigenic evolution can follow either a continuous model with steadily waning immunity or an epochal model featuring relatively long-lived antigenic clusters that are periodically replaced [41].

HIV employs fundamentally different immune escape mechanisms, with its envelope protein (Env) undergoing continuous evolution to evade both antibody-mediated and cell-mediated immunity. The virus achieves this through an extremely high mutation rate coupled with rapid turnover of virions, enabling it to explore countless antigenic variations within a single host [38]. This within-host diversification results in a "cloud" of genetic variants from which transmission bottlenecks select founding populations for new infections [38]. HIV's ability to establish latent infections further complicates its phylodynamic patterns, as reactivation of archived variants can introduce ancestral sequences into circulating populations.

Figure 1: HIV Within-host Evolution and Transmission Patterns. The diagram illustrates how within-host diversification followed by transmission bottlenecks generates characteristic phylogenetic relationships between donor and recipient viruses.

Methodological Framework: Experimental Protocols and Analytical Approaches

Genomic Sequencing and Phylogenetic Reconstruction

Phylodynamic analysis begins with genome sequencing of pathogen isolates, followed by phylogenetic reconstruction to infer evolutionary relationships. For influenza viruses, the CDC and other public health laboratories routinely sequence approximately 7,000 viruses annually from original clinical specimens collected through virologic surveillance [42]. Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) methodologies have largely replaced traditional Sanger sequencing, as they can detect minor genetic variations within virus populations from a single specimen [42].

The basic workflow for phylodynamic analysis involves: (1) collection of clinical specimens with appropriate epidemiological metadata; (2) RNA extraction and genome sequencing; (3) multiple sequence alignment and quality control; (4) phylogenetic tree reconstruction using probabilistic methods; (5) calibration of molecular clocks using sampling dates; and (6) phylodynamic inference using coalescent or birth-death models [43] [37]. For influenza, special attention is paid to the hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) gene segments, as these contain the antigenic sites under strongest selective pressure [42]. For HIV, sequencing often focuses on the envelope (env) and polymerase (pol) genes, with the latter particularly important for detecting drug resistance mutations.

Bayesian phylogenetic methods are particularly popular in phylodynamic studies because they enable researchers to fit complex demographic scenarios while integrating out phylogenetic uncertainty [17]. Software packages like BEAST (Bayesian Evolutionary Analysis by Sampling Trees) implement a wide range of evolutionary, population genetic, and phylogeographic models within a unified statistical framework [37]. These methods allow the joint estimation of evolutionary parameters (such as substitution rates and selection pressures) alongside epidemiological parameters (such as effective reproduction numbers and population growth rates).

Phylodynamic Inference Methods

The two primary statistical frameworks for phylodynamic inference are based on coalescent theory and birth-death processes [37]. Coalescent-based approaches work backwards in time to model the merging of genetic lineages into common ancestors, with the rate of coalescence inversely related to the effective population size [37]. Birth-death models instead work forward in time, explicitly modeling transmission, recovery, and sampling events [43]. Each approach has distinct advantages: coalescent methods are typically computationally efficient, while birth-death models can more naturally incorporate epidemiological parameters and accommodate changing sampling intensities.

Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) provides an alternative inference framework that is particularly useful when likelihood calculations are intractable [41]. ABC works by simulating data under different parameter values and accepting those simulations that produce summary statistics closely matching the observed data. This approach was effectively used to compare spatial models of influenza A/H3N2 phylodynamics, revealing that the virus's irregular interannual incidence and ladder-like hemagglutinin phylogeny are quantitatively reproduced only under an epochal evolution model within a spatial context [41].

Table 3: Key Phylodynamic Inference Methods and Applications

Methodological Approach	Theoretical Basis	Strengths	Primary Applications
Coalescent-based (Bayesian Skyline)	Coalescent theory	Computationally efficient; estimates historical population dynamics	Influenza seasonality patterns; HIV epidemic history [37]
Structured Birth-Death Models	Birth-death process with sampling	Naturally incorporates epidemiological parameters; handles variable sampling	SARS-CoV-2 variant spread; HIV transmission dynamics [43]
Discrete Trait Analysis (DTA)	Phylogenetic trait evolution	Low computational demand; incorporates discrete metadata	Influenza global migration patterns; HIV risk group transmission [43]
Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC)	Simulation-based inference	Handles complex models without likelihood calculations	Model comparison for influenza phylodynamics [41]
Phylogeographic Models	Continuous or discrete trait evolution	Reconstructs spatial spread	Rabies epidemic spread; SARS-CoV-2 international introductions [17] [43]

Figure 2: Standard Phylodynamic Workflow. The diagram illustrates the sequential steps from specimen collection to phylodynamic inference, showing how genetic sequences are transformed into epidemiological parameters.

Successful phylodynamic research requires specialized reagents, computational tools, and data resources. The following table summarizes key solutions used in the field.

Table 4: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Phylodynamic Studies

Resource Category	Specific Solution	Function/Application	Example Use Case
Sequencing Technologies	Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)	Detects minor genetic variations within virus populations	Characterizing within-host influenza diversity [42]
Public Sequence Databases	GISAID, GenBank	Provides access to globally representative sequence data	Tracking global influenza variant spread [42]
Phylogenetic Software	BEAST, MrBayes	Implements Bayesian phylogenetic inference with molecular clocks	Estimating HIV transmission network parameters [38]
Evolutionary Models	Codon substitution models (dN/dS)	Detects sites under positive or negative selection	Identifying influenza antigenic sites under immune pressure [17]
Epidemiological Metadata	Geographic, temporal, clinical data	Enables phylogeographic and trait evolution analysis	Reconstructing SARS-CoV-2 international spread [43]
Computational Resources	High-performance computing clusters	Handles computationally intensive Bayesian analyses	Large-scale SARS-CoV-2 phylodynamic analyses [44]

Applications in Public Health and Drug Development

Epidemic Tracking and Intervention Assessment

Phylodynamic approaches have proven invaluable for tracking epidemic spread and assessing intervention effectiveness. During the COVID-19 pandemic, phylogeographic methods reconstructed SARS-CoV-2 global dissemination patterns, revealing that early lineages were highly cosmopolitan while later lineages became more continent-specific following travel restrictions [43]. Similarly, analyses demonstrated that the diversity of hepatitis B virus declined in the Netherlands following vaccination program initiation, providing genetic evidence for vaccination effectiveness [17].

A particularly powerful application involves estimating the basic reproduction number (R₀) from genetic sequence data. This approach has been used for hepatitis C virus, HIV, and influenza, providing an alternative to traditional epidemiological methods that require careful control of reporting rate variations [17]. For example, a comparative phylodynamic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 variants in the Arabian Peninsula revealed that Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants went through sequential periods of growth and decline linked to air travel and disease control interventions [44]. The study further found that non-pharmaceutical interventions imposed between mid-2020 and early 2021 likely reduced epidemic progression of Beta and Alpha variants, while the combination of non-pharmaceutical interventions and rapid vaccination rollout shaped Delta variant dynamics [44].

Drug Development and Resistance Monitoring

Phylodynamics provides critical insights for drug development by identifying evolutionary constraints on pathogen proteins and tracking resistance emergence. For HIV, structural studies of integrase protein revealed surprising flexibility, with the protein forming distinct 16-part complexes during DNA integration versus simpler 4-part complexes when interacting with RNA later in replication [40]. These "structural blueprints" enable targeted drug design against specific functional conformations, potentially overcoming existing resistance mechanisms.

Phylodynamic approaches also monitor how antiviral treatments alter viral evolutionary trajectories. For HIV, studies showed that substitution rates dropped to effectively zero following antiretroviral therapy initiation, indicating cessation of viral replication [17]. This approach can also track the spread of resistant variants, as demonstrated by analyses of Oseltamivir resistance in influenza A/H1N1 [17]. By combining sequence data with treatment information, researchers can identify mutations conferring resistance and model their spatial and temporal spread across host populations.

Phylodynamics provides a powerful quantitative framework that bridges genetic sequences and epidemiological processes, offering unique insights into pathogen transmission dynamics, evolutionary trajectories, and intervention effectiveness. The comparative analysis of influenza and HIV phylogenies reveals how distinct selective pressures and transmission dynamics produce characteristic phylogenetic signatures with direct implications for public health strategy. As sequencing technologies continue to advance and computational methods become increasingly sophisticated, phylodynamic approaches will play an expanding role in pandemic preparedness, outbreak response, and therapeutic development. The integration of genomic surveillance with phylodynamic analysis represents a paradigm shift in how we understand and combat infectious diseases, enabling researchers to translate genetic data into actionable public health insights.

Inferring Transmission Dynamics, Population Size Changes, and Spatial Spread from Phylogenies

The field of viral phylodynamics uses phylogenetic trees reconstructed from pathogen genetic sequences to infer epidemiological and evolutionary processes shaping viral epidemics [45]. For researchers and drug development professionals, understanding these dynamics is crucial for informing public health interventions, anticipating the emergence of antiviral resistance, and designing targeted therapies. This review performs a comparative analysis of two major human pathogens—Influenza and HIV—that exhibit fundamentally different phylodynamic characteristics due to their distinct biological properties and epidemiological contexts. Influenza, an acute respiratory infection with seasonal epidemic patterns, contrasts sharply with HIV, a chronic infection that establishes long-lasting infections within hosts. These differences are imprinted on their genetic sequences and, consequently, their phylogenies, enabling researchers to reconstruct transmission dynamics, population size changes, and spatial spread at various scales.

The core premise of phylodynamics is that epidemiological processes, such as changes in the number of infected individuals (effective population size, N~e~) and patterns of spatial spread, leave characteristic signatures in the shape and structure of viral phylogenies [45]. The comparative approach outlined here provides a powerful framework for selecting appropriate analytical tools and interpreting phylogenetic patterns within their specific biological contexts, ultimately enhancing the accuracy of scientific inferences for both established and emerging pathogens.

Theoretical Foundations of Phylodynamics

Viral phylodynamics connects population-level epidemiological processes with evolutionary patterns observable in phylogenetic trees. Three fundamental relationships form the basis for inferring dynamics from phylogenies [45]:

• Population Size & Branch Lengths: The relative lengths of internal versus external branches in a phylogeny are affected by changes in viral population size over time. Rapid epidemic expansion generates "star-like" trees with long external branches relative to short internal branches, as seen in the early HIV epidemic. In contrast, a stable population size produces more balanced branch lengths.
• Population Structure & Taxa Clustering: Non-random clustering of genetic sequences on a phylogeny reflects host population structure. Viruses from hosts within the same geographic region or risk group are more closely related when transmission occurs more frequently between them.
• Selection & Tree Balance: Directional selection, such as immune escape in influenza, produces imbalanced, "ladder-like" trees. More balanced trees, as often observed for the HIV envelope protein at the between-host level, suggest neutral evolution or purifying selection.

These patterns provide the theoretical foundation for quantitative inference of epidemiological parameters from genetic sequence data.

Visualizing Core Phylodynamic Concepts

The diagram below illustrates the fundamental relationships between epidemiological processes and phylogenetic tree structures.

Comparative Evolutionary Dynamics: Influenza vs. HIV

Key Phylodynamic Contrasts Between Influenza and HIV

Table 1: Fundamental differences in the phylodynamic characteristics of Influenza and HIV.

Characteristic	Influenza Virus	HIV
Infection Type	Acute respiratory infection	Chronic systemic infection
Within-Host Evolution	Limited diversity during acute infection; strong selective bottlenecks at transmission [46]	Extensive within-host diversity; complex evolutionary dynamics over years of chronic infection [45]
Between-Host Evolution	Strong antigenic drift driven by global selective pressures; antigenic sites show elevated nonsynonymous substitution rates between hosts [46]	More balanced between-host phylogenies; complex mix of neutral evolution and selective pressures varying by region and risk group [45]
Dominant Selective Pressures	Immune escape (directional selection); purifying selection against deleterious mutations [46]	Immune escape within hosts; adaptation to coreceptors; drug resistance selection with treatment
Typical Phylogenetic Pattern	Ladder-like tree for hemagglutinin (HA) reflecting antigenic drift [45]	Star-like tree (early epidemic); more balanced tree for between-host envelope sequences [45]
Spatial Spread Pattern	Global circulation with seasonal patterns in temperate regions; limited strong spatial structure over extended periods [45]	Strong spatial and risk-group clustering reflecting structured contact networks

Quantitative Evolutionary Rates and Selection Pressures

Table 2: Comparative evolutionary dynamics and selection patterns within and between hosts.

Evolutionary Parameter	Influenza Virus (H3N2)	HIV-1
Within-Host Synonymous Rate	Similar to between-host rate [46]	Varies by infection stage and compartment
Within-Host Nonsynonymous Rate	Higher than between-host rate for most genes; reflects transient deleterious mutations [46]	Complex patterns; can be very high during chronic infection
Between-Host Nonsynonymous Rate (Antigenic Sites)	Elevated compared to within-host, indicating positive selection for antigenic change [46]	Varies by protein and epidemic context
Between-Host Nonsynonymous Rate (Non-Antigenic Sites)	Lower than within-host, indicating purifying selection [46]	Subject to purifying and diversifying selection
Key Evolutionary Mechanism	Antigenic drift	Immune escape, drug resistance, and within-host adaptation

A critical insight from comparative studies is the scale-dependent action of selection. For influenza, nonsynonymous mutations are often enriched within hosts but depleted between hosts, suggesting that many protein-altering changes are deleterious and purged during transmission [46]. The exception occurs at antigenic sites, where selection favors nonsynonymous mutations at the global scale, driving antigenic drift. This indicates that antigenic selection primarily operates at the between-host level [46].

Methodological Framework: From Sequences to Dynamics

Core Analytical Approaches

Translating viral genetic sequences into epidemiological insights requires specialized analytical methods, primarily employing Bayesian phylogenetic frameworks that jointly estimate evolutionary and population dynamics [45].

• Coalescent Theory: Models the ancestry of sampled gene copies backward in time. The rate at which lineages coalesce (find a common ancestor) is inversely proportional to the effective population size (N~e~). Non-parametric skyline methods plot changes in N~e~ over time, providing a proxy for changes in the number of infected individuals [45].
• Structured Coalescent Models: Extend coalescent theory to structured populations, simultaneously estimating effective population sizes in different demes (e.g., geographic locations) and migration rates between them.
• Birth-Death Models: Forward-time models that describe lineage birth (transmission), death (recovery/removal), and sampling. These can be directly parameterized with epidemiological rates.
• Discrete Trait Analysis (DTA): Infers the transition of discrete traits (e.g., geographic location, host species) across phylogeny to model spatial spread and cross-species transmission.

A significant recent advancement is the MASCOT-Skyline method, which integrates population and migration dynamics within a structured coalescent skyline approach [47]. This method jointly infers time-varying effective population sizes across different locations and migration rates between them, addressing known biases that arise when spatial and temporal dynamics are modeled separately [47] [48].

Experimental and Analytical Workflow

The end-to-end process for inferring transmission dynamics from pathogen genomes involves a standardized workflow, from sample collection to phylodynamic inference, as visualized below.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Solutions

Table 3: Key reagents, tools, and software essential for conducting phylodynamic analyses.

Category	Item	Primary Function
Wet Lab	Viral RNA/DNA Extraction Kits	Isolate high-quality genetic material from clinical samples for sequencing.
	Reverse Transcription and PCR Kits	Amplify viral genomes, often in multiple fragments, for next-generation sequencing.
	Target Enrichment Probes	Capture viral genomic material from complex clinical samples with low viral load.
	Next-Generation Sequencers	Generate high-throughput sequence data from multiple samples in parallel.
Bioinformatics	Sequence Alignment Tools (MAFFT, MUSCLE)	Align consensus sequences or reads to a reference genome for comparative analysis.
	Variant Callers (LoFreq, VarScan)	Identify low-frequency within-host variants from deep sequencing data [46].
	Phylodynamic Software (BEAST2)	Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees; the primary platform for phylodynamic inference [47].
	Structured Coalescent Packages (MASCOT)	BEAST2 package for phylogeographic inference using the structured coalescent [47].
Analytical	Molecular Clock Models	Estimate evolutionary rates in real time and date ancestral nodes.
	Skyline Plots	Reconstruct non-parametric changes in effective population size over time.
	Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)	Bayesian statistical method for estimating posterior distributions of model parameters.

Application to Viral Transmission and Control

Inferring Transmission Dynamics and Spatial Spread

Phylodynamic methods have yielded critical insights into the transmission patterns of both influenza and HIV:

• Influenza Spatial Dynamics: Despite global circulation, influenza A/H3N2 phylogenies often lack strong spatial structure over extended periods, suggesting frequent global movement and a metapopulation dynamics [45]. This contrasts with pathogens like measles, which show clearer spatial clustering.
• HIV Transmission Networks: HIV phylogenies reveal strong clustering by geographic location and risk group, reflecting the importance of structured contact networks. These analyses can identify key drivers of transmission in specific epidemics, informing targeted public health interventions [49].
• Zoonotic Origins and Emergence: Phylodynamic models help date epidemic origins and quantify spillover events. For example, analysis of highly pathogenic avian influenza A (HPAI) H5 and H7 viruses has identified parallel mutations associated with the emergence of the highly pathogenic phenotype across independent lineages, revealing a genetic predisposition for virulence evolution [50].

Evaluating Control Interventions

Phylodynamics provides a powerful tool for assessing the impact of public health interventions:

• Vaccination Impact: The decline in genetic diversity of hepatitis B virus in the Netherlands following vaccination program initiation provided evidence of reduced prevalence [45].
• Antiviral Therapy: Within-host HIV substitution rates drop dramatically following antiretroviral therapy initiation, indicating effective suppression of viral replication [45]. Conversely, phylodynamics can track the emergence and spread of drug-resistant strains in both HIV and influenza [45].
• Structural Interventions for HIV: Mathematical models that incorporate structural determinants (e.g., stigma, criminalization, housing instability) are increasingly used to quantify the population-level impact of social and policy interventions on HIV transmission, guiding the implementation of the UNAIDS Global AIDS Strategy [51].

Critical Considerations and Best Practices

Addressing Methodological Challenges

Several methodological challenges require careful consideration in phylodynamic study design:

• Sampling Biases: Inferred migration rates and population sizes can be highly sensitive to uneven sampling across locations or time periods. A location with more intensive sampling may appear to be a major source of transmission, potentially reflecting surveillance effort rather than true epidemiological dynamics [47] [48].
• Model Selection: Choosing an inappropriate demographic or spatial model can lead to biased inferences. For instance, assuming constant population sizes in a rapidly expanding epidemic, or ignoring population structure when it exists, can misrepresent true dynamics.
• Temporal Signal: Reliable estimation of evolutionary rates and time scales requires a sufficient "clock-like" signal in the sequence data, which can be weak in recently emerged pathogens or those with low substitution rates.
• Integrating Data Types: Strengthening phylodynamic inferences increasingly involves combining genomic data with traditional epidemiological data (e.g., incidence, contact patterns), which remains an active and challenging area of research [45].

Recommendations for Robust Inference

• Joint Inference: Use models like MASCOT-Skyline that jointly infer spatial and temporal dynamics to avoid biases introduced by analyzing them separately [47].
• Sensitivity Analysis: Conduct analyses under multiple models and sampling assumptions to test the robustness of key conclusions.
• Empirical Calibration: Where possible, calibrate model parameters, such as those linking structural determinants to HIV risk, using longitudinal empirical evidence to improve validity [51].
• Reporting Transparency: Clearly report sampling schemes, model assumptions, and software settings to enable critical evaluation and reproducibility of results.

Molecular Clock Models for Dating Viral Origins and Transmission Events

The molecular clock hypothesis posits that genes or proteins evolve at a constant rate, serving as a foundational tool for reconstructing phylogenetic relationships and dating evolutionary events across species. This hypothesis has revolutionized virology by enabling researchers to trace viral transmission chains, estimate emergence timelines, and understand evolutionary dynamics of fast-evolving pathogens. When applied to viruses, the molecular clock provides a powerful framework for investigating the origins and spread of epidemics by measuring the accumulation of genetic mutations over time. The theoretical foundation rests on the neutral theory of molecular evolution, which suggests that the majority of evolutionary changes result from the random fixation of neutral mutations, though in practice, selective pressures can influence evolutionary rates.

The application of molecular clocks to viruses presents both unique challenges and opportunities. Viruses, particularly RNA viruses with high mutation rates and rapid replication cycles, exhibit evolutionary rates orders of magnitude faster than their hosts, enabling observations of evolution over remarkably short timescales. Research has demonstrated that the evolutionary process of viral genes can be explained by the neutral theory, supported by the observation that synonymous substitutions consistently predominate over nonsynonymous substitutions across diverse viruses [52]. This article provides a comprehensive comparison of molecular clock methodologies as applied to two significant human pathogens: Influenza virus and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), focusing on their performance characteristics, experimental requirements, and applications in dating viral origins and transmission events for researchers and drug development professionals.

Quantitative Comparison of Viral Evolutionary Rates

Table 1: Comparative Evolutionary Rates Across Viruses and Genomic Regions

Virus	Genomic Region	Substitution Rate (subs/site/year)	Evolutionary Context	Key Findings
Influenza A (H3N2)	Hemagglutinin (HA)	(3.81 \times 10^{-3}) (pre-COVID-19)	Inter-host, seasonal	Rate accelerated during pandemic restrictions [53]
Influenza A (H3N2)	Hemagglutinin (HA)	(7.96 \times 10^{-3}) (during COVID-19)	Inter-host, pandemic	2.1× increase versus pre-pandemic rate [53]
Influenza B (Victoria)	Hemagglutinin (HA)	(1.80 \times 10^{-3}) (pre-COVID-19)	Inter-host, seasonal	Rate accelerated during pandemic restrictions [53]
Influenza B (Victoria)	Hemagglutinin (HA)	(3.11 \times 10^{-3}) (during COVID-19)	Inter-host, pandemic	1.7× increase versus pre-pandemic rate [53]
HIV-1	env V3 region	(6.7 × 10^{-3})	Inter-host, chronic	Supported molecular clock hypothesis [54]
HIV-1	p17gag	(2.7 × 10^{-3})	Inter-host, chronic	Supported molecular clock hypothesis [54]
HIV-1	Full envelope	(2.69 × 10^{-5}) (mean) per day	Intra-host, acute (150 days)	Linear diversification under immune selection [55]

Table 2: Methodological Performance Comparison for Phylogenomic Data

Method	Rate Assumption	Computational Speed	Calibration Flexibility	Uncertainty Estimation	Best Application Context
Bayesian (BEAST)	Random rates across lineages	Baseline (slow)	Probability distributions	Credibility intervals	Gold standard when computational resources allow [56]
Relative Rate Framework (RelTime)	Lineage rates vary minimally	>100× faster than treePL	Uniform, normal, lognormal distributions	Analytical confidence intervals	Large phylogenomic datasets requiring rapid analysis [57]
Penalized Likelihood (treePL)	Autocorrelated rates	Faster than Bayesian but slower than RelTime	Minimum/maximum bounds only	Bootstrap approach	Datasets with strong rate autocorrelation assumption [57]

Experimental Protocols for Molecular Clock Analysis

Sample Collection and Sequencing Workflow

The foundation of reliable molecular clock analysis depends on rigorous sample processing and sequencing. For both influenza and HIV studies, the general workflow follows these critical stages:

• Sample Collection: Throat swabs (influenza) or blood samples (HIV) are collected from infected individuals with appropriate ethical approvals. For influenza surveillance, samples are typically obtained from patients presenting with influenza-like illness (fever ≥37.3°C accompanied by respiratory symptoms) [53]. HIV studies often leverage existing cohorts or transmission clusters with known epidemiological linkages [58].

• Nucleic Acid Extraction: Viral RNA/DNA is extracted using commercial nucleic acid extraction kits. For archival samples (e.g., formalin-fixed tissues from historical pandemics), specialized protocols including heat treatment to reverse formalin-induced cross-links may be necessary [59].

• Library Preparation and Sequencing: Following DNase treatment and ribosomal RNA depletion, high-throughput sequencing libraries are prepared. Current best practices utilize next-generation sequencing platforms (Illumina) for comprehensive genomic data, though Sanger sequencing remains applicable for specific questions [58] [59].

Molecular Clock Calibration and Validation

Calibration represents the most critical aspect of molecular dating, directly impacting the accuracy of divergence time estimates:

• Calibration Point Selection: External information with known temporal references must be incorporated. This includes:

  • Sample collection dates: Known sampling times for heterochronous sequences
  • Historical events: Documented transmission pairs or known introduction events
  • Fossil records: Paleontological evidence for deep evolutionary studies

• Rate Estimation Validation: For HIV, validation studies have compared molecular clock inferences with clinically estimated infection dates. One comprehensive analysis demonstrated strong correlation (Spearman's ρ = 0.93, p < 0.001) between molecularly inferred and clinically estimated infection dates, with the lowest differences identified in people who inject drugs (median difference: 0.18 years) [58].

• Model Selection: Statistical tests must be applied to determine the optimal clock model. For HIV-1 envelope genes, researchers have used mixed effects models to analyze diversification dynamics, testing both linear and quadratic terms to identify potential rate attenuation over time [55].

Performance Analysis Across Viral Pathogens and Methodologies

Influenza Molecular Clock Applications

Influenza virus evolution demonstrates distinctive molecular clock patterns that have been instrumental in understanding pandemic dynamics. Research on archival influenza genomes from the 1918 pandemic has revealed measurable genomic variability, with genomes sampled on the same continents exhibiting lower overall divergence (0.11-0.16%) than genomes from different continents (0.16-0.32%), compatible with spatio-temporal effects of local transmission [59]. This historical perspective provides crucial baseline data for understanding natural evolutionary rates without modern intervention pressures.

Recent studies during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed unexpected evolutionary dynamics. Despite extraordinarily low detection rates of influenza infection during periods of strict COVID-19 control measures, molecular surveillance in Guangdong, China, identified accelerated evolutionary rates for both influenza A(H3N2) and B/Victoria viruses [53]. This phenomenon suggests that concealed influenza transmission may have occurred between individuals during strict COVID-19 control, ultimately leading to the accumulation of viral mutations and accelerated evolution. This finding has critical implications for pandemic preparedness, highlighting how non-pharmaceutical interventions can unexpectedly alter viral evolutionary trajectories.

HIV Molecular Clock Applications

HIV evolution presents a more complex picture for molecular clock applications due to intense host immune selection pressures. Research has demonstrated that despite strong selective forces, HIV-1 maintains a measurable molecular clock signal. Analysis of 1,587 HIV-1 full envelope gene sequences obtained during acute infection from 15 subjects revealed that sequence diversity increased linearly during the first 150 days post-infection, with rates ranging from (1.54 \times 10^{-5}) to (3.91 \times 10^{-5}) per base per day (mean: (2.69 \times 10^{-5})) [55]. This rate closely approximates the expected neutral evolution rate of (2.16 \times 10^{-5}) per base per day, suggesting that the molecular clock remains applicable even during early immune selection.

The persistence of HIV's molecular clock under immune pressure can be explained by the virus's ability to escape from immune surveillance through multiple independent pathways. Mathematical modeling has demonstrated that when multiple escape lineages emerge simultaneously, the deviation from a constant molecular clock becomes negligible [55]. This finding is significant for molecular dating applications because it indicates that the most recent common ancestor of virus pairs from distinct escape lineages likely corresponds to the transmitted founder virus, enabling reliable estimation of infection timelines even after the original founder viruses are no longer detectable in the viral population.

Advanced Methodologies and Emerging Approaches

Relaxed Clock Method Performance

The performance of relaxed-clock methods has been systematically evaluated through computer simulation studies. Research examining the relative performance of Bayesian (BEAST), Penalized Likelihood (treePL), and Relative Rate Framework (RelTime) methods revealed that when the assumed model of lineage rate changes matches the actual model, estimated times are generally close to true values, and 95% credibility intervals contain the true time for ≥95% of simulated datasets [56]. However, these methods demonstrate limited robustness when the underlying lineage rate model is violated, with correctness frequency dropping to approximately 83%.

A comprehensive assessment of 23 empirical phylogenomic datasets found that the Relative Rate Framework (RelTime) was computationally faster (more than 100 times faster than treePL) and generally provided node age estimates statistically equivalent to Bayesian divergence times [57]. This performance advantage makes RelTime particularly valuable for analyzing massive genomic datasets where computational constraints might otherwise limit analytical options. Conversely, Penalized Likelihood approaches consistently exhibited low levels of uncertainty in time estimates, potentially providing misleading precision in some applications.

Epigenetic Clocks for Short-Term Evolution

A groundbreaking development in molecular dating has emerged with the discovery of epigenetic clocks based on cytosine methylation patterns in plants. This epimutation clock represents a fast-ticking evolutionary timer that achieves resolution in the order of years to decades, compared to conventional DNA-based clocks that tick too slowly for short-term evolutionary studies [60]. Research on seagrass (Zostera marina) clones demonstrated that epimutation-based dating could accurately pinpoint divergence events within a year, whereas classical DNA mutation-based molecular clocks showed uncertainty of about a decade.

While this epigenetic clock has thus far been applied primarily to plants, the methodology suggests promising avenues for viral evolution research, particularly for studying short-term transmission dynamics where conventional molecular clocks lack sufficient resolution. The concept of exploiting faster-evolving molecular markers could potentially be adapted to viral systems through the identification of rapidly changing epigenetic modifications or other molecular features beyond primary genetic sequence.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Computational Tools for Molecular Clock Analysis

Category	Specific Tool/Reagent	Application Purpose	Key Features
Wet Lab Reagents	Viral transport medium	Sample preservation during transport	Maintains viral integrity for sequencing [53]
Wet Lab Reagents	Nucleic acid extraction kits	RNA/DNA isolation from specimens	Commercial kits (e.g., Shanghai Kehua) [53]
Wet Lab Reagents	Reverse transcription PCR kits	cDNA synthesis and amplification	Target-specific or random priming approaches [53]
Sequencing Platforms	Illumina platforms	High-throughput sequencing	Shotgun metagenomics for archival samples [59]
Sequencing Platforms	Sanger sequencing	Validation and targeted sequencing	Lower throughput but high accuracy [58]
Alignment Tools	MUSCLE software	Multiple sequence alignment	Default parameters often sufficient [53]
Phylogenetic Software	IQ-TREE	Maximum likelihood phylogenies	Model selection, rapid bootstrapping [53]
Molecular Dating	BEAST	Bayesian evolutionary analysis	Flexible clock models, demographic reconstruction [56]
Molecular Dating	MCMCTree	Bayesian divergence dating	Approximate likelihood, large datasets [57]
Molecular Dating	RelTime	Fast divergence time estimation	Relative rate framework, no clock assumption [57]
Molecular Dating	treePL	Penalized likelihood dating	Rate autocorrelation assumption [57]
Analytical Packages	R "treedater" package	Molecular dating in R	Strict molecular clock, root-to-tip regression [53]

Molecular clock methodologies provide indispensable tools for reconstructing viral evolutionary timelines and transmission pathways. The comparative analysis presented here reveals that methodological choice depends critically on research questions, dataset characteristics, and computational resources. For influenza studies, molecular clocks have illuminated how external pressures like pandemic interventions can unexpectedly alter evolutionary trajectories, with documented rate accelerations during restriction periods [53]. For HIV, molecular clocks have demonstrated remarkable resilience even under intense immune selection, enabling reliable dating of transmission events [55].

The continuing development of faster, more accurate dating methods like the Relative Rate Framework [57] and emerging epigenetic clocks [60] promises to enhance our ability to resolve ever-finer evolutionary timescales. These advances will be crucial for addressing ongoing challenges in viral evolution, including understanding the impact of global change on pathogen dynamics, tracking real-time transmission networks for public health intervention, and developing more effective antiviral strategies based on evolutionary principles. As molecular clock methodologies continue to evolve, their integration with epidemiological and clinical data will further strengthen their utility for both basic virology and applied public health.

The race between viral evolution and medical countermeasures is a central challenge in modern infectious disease management. This dynamic is perfectly illustrated by the comparative evolutionary trajectories of influenza and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), which exhibit distinct phylogenetic patterns driven by their unique pathogenesis and transmission dynamics. Influenza viruses, with their short infectious periods and strong selective pressure from population immunity, often produce pectinate, comb-like phylogenies characterized by sequential replacement of dominant strains [18]. In contrast, the life-long nature of HIV infection, which allows rapidly diverging lineages to proliferate and persist over time, results in star-like phylogenies with short branches near the root and long branches at the tips [18]. These fundamental differences in evolutionary shape reflect deeper constraints that inform vaccine design strategies.

Against this phylogenetic backdrop, the annual selection of influenza vaccine strains represents a particularly formidable challenge. The World Health Organization (WHO) must recommend specific strains for inclusion in seasonal vaccines approximately 6-9 months before the influenza season begins, creating a significant forecasting problem [61] [62]. When selected strains antigenically match circulating viruses, vaccine effectiveness (VE) can reach 40-60%; however, mismatches can cause effectiveness to plummet, as witnessed during the 2014-2015 season when VE against influenza A(H3N2) was just 19% [61] [62]. This precision problem has motivated the development of artificial intelligence (AI) approaches, notably the VaxSeer system, which aims to transform strain selection from a largely expert-driven process to one augmented by predictive machine learning models.

VaxSeer represents a novel AI framework that integrates two complementary predictive models to estimate the future performance of candidate vaccine strains. The system addresses the dual aspects of vaccine effectiveness: how well a vaccine can inhibit a virus (antigenicity), and which viruses will be circulating (dominance) [61] [63].

Core Predictive Components

Table 1: Core Components of the VaxSeer Framework

Component	Function	Technical Innovation	Data Sources
Dominance Predictor	Estimates future seasonal dominance of viral strains	Protein language model + Ordinary Differential Equations (ODEs) to model dynamic dominance shifts	GISAID database HA protein sequences with collection dates [61]
Antigenicity Predictor	Predicts hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test results for vaccine-virus pairs	Neural network architecture encoding protein multiple sequence alignments (MSAs)	WHO Collaborating Centre HI test results using post-infection ferret antisera [61]

Integrated Workflow and Implementation

The following diagram illustrates the integrated VaxSeer workflow for predicting vaccine strain effectiveness:

VaxSeer generates a coverage score for each candidate vaccine by averaging its predicted antigenicity across multiple circulating viruses, weighted by their predicted dominance [61]. This score serves as a prospective measure of how well a given vaccine will likely perform against future viral strains. The model focuses specifically on the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the primary target of the immune response to influenza, representing vaccine and virus strains solely through their HA protein sequences [61] [64].

Experimental Protocols and Validation Methodologies

Data Curation and Preprocessing

The development and validation of VaxSeer required meticulously curated datasets spanning multiple influenza seasons. For a comprehensive 10-year retrospective evaluation, researchers assembled:

• Viral Sequence Data: HA protein sequences with associated collection times from the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID) database, enabling quantification of viral dominance across seasons [61].
• Antigenicity Measurements: Hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test results based on post-infection ferret antisera from reports prepared by the Francis Crick Institute WHO Collaborating Centre for annual vaccine composition consultations from 2003 to 2023 [61].
• Vaccine Effectiveness Data: Real-world VE estimates from multiple independent surveillance networks, including the U.S. CDC Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network, Europe's I-MOVE network, and Canada's Sentinel Practitioner Surveillance Network (SPSN) [61].

To avoid potential confounding factors, the analysis excluded the 2020 and 2021 influenza seasons due to the impact of SARS-CoV-2 interventions, resulting in 10 past recommended vaccines with available effectiveness data for two subtypes (A/H3N2 and A/H1N1) [61].

Model Training and Implementation

Dominance Predictor Training

The dominance predictor learns the relationship between HA sequences and changes in their dominance over time. The training process incorporates:

• Protein Language Models: Two language models predict the initial dominance and its rate of change for each protein sequence [61].
• Dynamic Modeling: An ordinary differential equation (ODE) framework integrates these predictions to derive dominance at future time points, accounting for competition between viral strains [61] [64].
• Training Objective: Models are trained by aligning predicted dominance with actual protein distributions observed in surveillance data [61].

Unlike traditional epidemiological studies that estimate evolutionary rates as the sum of independent contributions from single amino acid mutations, VaxSeer's approach captures combinatorial effects of mutations and higher-level properties such as protein stability through its protein language model architecture [61] [64].

Antigenicity Predictor Training

The antigenicity predictor learns to map relationships between vaccine-virus protein sequence pairs and their corresponding HI test results:

• Architecture: Based on neural network designs for encoding protein multiple sequence alignments, capturing relationships both within single sequences and across pairs of sequences [61].
• Training Regimen: Model is trained by regressing predicted antigenicity with actual antigenicity measurements from HI assays [61].
• Output: Enables in silico prediction of HI test outcomes for any vaccine-virus pair, significantly reducing the need for resource-intensive laboratory experiments [61].

Performance Evaluation Metrics

The primary evaluation compared VaxSeer's recommendations against actual WHO selections using:

• Empirical Coverage Score: A surrogate metric for vaccine effectiveness calculated from observed viral dominance and experimental HI test results [61]. This served as the main counterfactual evaluation measure for strains not actually selected for vaccination campaigns.
• Real-World Correlation: Analysis of the relationship between predicted coverage scores and actual vaccine effectiveness estimates from public health agencies [61].

Comparative Performance Analysis: VaxSeer vs. Traditional Methods

Retrospective Strain Selection Accuracy

Table 2: VaxSeer vs. WHO Strain Selection Performance (10-Year Retrospective Analysis)

Influenza Subtype	VaxSeer Superior Performance	Equivalent Performance	WHO Superior Performance	Notable Specific Season
A/H3N2	9 out of 10 seasons [64] [62]	0 seasons	1 out of 10 seasons	Consistent outperformance across most seasons [62]
A/H1N1	6 out of 10 seasons [64] [62]	1 season [64]	3 out of 10 seasons	Identified optimal strain for 2016 season one year early [64]

In the retrospective evaluation, VaxSeer demonstrated a marked improvement over traditional selection methods, particularly for the A/H3N2 subtype, which is known for its rapid evolutionary rate and antigenic flexibility. The model identified the best antigenic match strain in 7 of 10 years for H1N1 and 5 of 10 years for H3N2, while the WHO-recommended strain matched the best antigenic strain only 3 times for H1N1 and failed to do so for H3N2 during the study decade [62].

Correlation with Real-World Vaccine Effectiveness

Beyond retrospective strain matching, VaxSeer's predicted coverage scores showed strong correlation with real-world public health outcomes:

• The predicted coverage score exhibited a strong correlation with influenza vaccine effectiveness estimates from the CDC, I-MOVE (Europe), and SPSN (Canada) [61].
• The model's predictions also aligned closely with reductions in disease burden, showing correlation with the number of symptomatic illnesses and medical visits averted by influenza vaccines in the United States as estimated by the CDC [61] [64].
• Early real-world data for the 2025-2026 season, while noting a potential strain mismatch with emerging H3N2 subclade K, still shows encouraging vaccine effectiveness estimates of 70-75% in children and 30-40% in adults in early UK data [65].

Table 3: Essential Research Resources for AI-Driven Vaccine Strain Selection

Resource Category	Specific Examples	Function in Research	Access Considerations
Sequence Databases	GISAID [61], NCBI	Provides viral protein sequences with temporal metadata for training dominance predictors	Some databases require data-sharing agreements or have specific attribution policies
Antigenicity Data	WHO CC HI test results [61], JSRC-000810	Ground truth data for training antigenicity prediction models	Often requires collaboration with reference laboratories
Computational Frameworks	Protein language models, ODE solvers [61]	Core components for building predictive models of viral evolution	Open-source implementations increase accessibility
Validation Data Sources	CDC VE estimates [61], I-MOVE network [61], SPSN Canada [61]	Real-world effectiveness data for model validation	Regional networks provide complementary perspectives

Comparative Evolutionary Analysis: Influenza vs. HIV Phylogenies

The phylogenetic distinction between influenza and HIV provides crucial context for understanding the specific challenges of influenza vaccine design. These differences can be visualized in their characteristic tree shapes:

Influenza's pectinate, comb-like phylogenies emerge from its short infectious period and antigenic drift, where few lineages persist between successive epidemics [18]. This creates the sequential replacement pattern that makes annual strain prediction both necessary and challenging. In contrast, HIV's star-like phylogenies with short branches near the root and long branches at the tips reflect persistent infection and ongoing transmission among hosts, allowing rapidly diverging lineages to coexist [18]. This fundamental difference in evolutionary dynamics explains why vaccine design strategies must differ substantially between these pathogens.

Discussion and Future Directions

The development of VaxSeer represents a significant advancement in the application of AI to address the persistent challenge of influenza vaccine strain selection. By integrating predictions of both viral dominance and antigenic match, the system provides a comprehensive framework for evaluating candidate vaccines months before manufacturing must begin.

Limitations and Constraints

Despite its promising performance, VaxSeer has several important limitations:

• The current model focuses exclusively on the hemagglutinin (HA) protein and does not incorporate other viral proteins such as neuraminidase (NA), which also contributes to immune response and viral evolution [61] [64].
• The framework does not yet account for host-specific factors such as immune history, which can significantly influence vaccine effectiveness [61] [62].
• Model performance depends on the availability of high-quality, curated datasets for training, which may be limited for emerging viral threats or in low-resource settings [64].
• The system has primarily been validated on influenza A subtypes with less extensive evaluation for influenza B lineages [61].

Future Research Trajectories

Future developments in AI-driven vaccine strain selection will likely focus on:

• Incorporating additional viral proteins, particularly neuraminidase (NA), to create a more comprehensive antigenic match score [64].
• Integration of host immune factors and population-level immunity into predictive models [62].
• Extension to other rapidly evolving pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2, building on methods developed for influenza [64] [66].
• Applications in low-data regimes through transfer learning and few-shot learning approaches [64].

The integration of artificial intelligence into viral evolution prediction and vaccine strain selection marks a paradigm shift in our approach to seasonal influenza control. VaxSeer demonstrates that machine learning methods can outperform traditional expert-driven approaches by simultaneously modeling multiple aspects of viral evolution - both which strains will dominate and how well candidate vaccines will match them. When contextualized within the broader framework of comparative viral evolution, particularly the phylogenetic differences between influenza and HIV, these advances highlight how pathogen-specific evolutionary dynamics must inform vaccine design strategies.

As these technologies continue to mature, they offer the promise of not only improving seasonal influenza vaccines but also creating more responsive systems for addressing emerging viral threats. The integration of AI into the vaccine selection process represents a critical step toward more predictive, preemptive public health responses to rapidly evolving pathogens.

Using Phylogenies to Map Antigenic Evolution and Guide Vaccine and Drug Target Selection

The application of phylogenetic analyses to understand antigenic evolution has become a cornerstone of modern infectious disease management. For rapidly mutating viruses such as influenza and HIV, tracking evolutionary pathways through phylogenetic trees is not merely an academic exercise but a critical tool in a relentless arms race between pathogen adaptation and medical intervention. While both viruses evolve to escape host immunity, their evolutionary speeds, mechanisms, and consequently, the phylogenetic approaches used to combat them, differ substantially. Influenza A/H3N2, with its extraordinarily rapid antigenic drift, accumulates three to four amino-acid substitutions per year in its hemagglutinin (HA) protein, necessitating biannual vaccine updates [67]. In contrast, HIV-1, with a high mutation rate of approximately 10−5 mutations per base per replication cycle and frequent recombination, has generated extraordinary genetic diversity within a single human host, complicating vaccine development but opening avenues for targeted antiretroviral therapy [27]. This guide compares how phylogenetic tracking informs vaccine strain selection against influenza's population-level evolution versus HIV's within-host diversity and reservoir persistence, detailing the experimental data, protocols, and reagents that underpin these strategies.

Influenza Phylogenies: Forecasting Population-Level Evolution for Vaccines

Key Evolutionary Challenges and Phylogenetic Applications

Influenza's evolutionary landscape is characterized by antigenic drift, where mutations in surface proteins, particularly HA, allow the virus to escape population immunity. This drift necessitates a perpetual cycle of vaccine updates. Phylogenetic models are used to track the emergence and spread of novel clades—groups of viruses sharing a recent common ancestor—to predict which will dominate future seasons. The World Health Organization (WHO) uses these forecasts, based on HA sequences from the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID), to select vaccine strains roughly 12 months before the peak of the influenza season [68]. The central challenge is the long forecast horizon and the ~3-month average lag between sample collection and sequence submission, which obscures the true picture of circulating diversity at the decision point [68].

Supporting Data and Impact of Technological Advances

Recent research quantifies the profound impact of modernizing public health approaches on forecasting accuracy. A shift to faster vaccine platforms (e.g., mRNA) that reduces the forecast horizon from 12 to 6 months, coupled with enhanced genomic surveillance that cuts submission lags, could dramatically improve predictions.

Table 1: Impact of Forecast Horizon and Sequencing Lag on Influenza A/H3N2 Prediction Accuracy

Forecast Horizon	Submission Lag	Relative Forecasting Error	Uncertainty in Clade Frequencies
12 months	3 months (realistic)	Baseline	Baseline
6 months	3 months	Reduced to 25% of baseline	Not Reported
3 months	3 months	Reduced to 50% of baseline	Not Reported
12 months	1 month (ideal)	Minimal improvement	Reduced by 50%

Data adapted from a study on forecast accuracy for seasonal influenza A/H3N2 [68].

A 2025 study provided a near real-time portrait of the human neutralizing antibody landscape, using a high-throughput sequencing-based neutralization assay to make 26,148 neutralization titer measurements from 188 human sera collected between 2024 and 2025 against 140 contemporary viruses [67]. This dataset exemplifies the granular, population-level immunity data that can inform vaccine strain selection.

Core Experimental Protocol: High-Throughput Sequencing-Based Neutralization Assay

This protocol is designed to measure neutralizing antibodies against a wide diversity of influenza strains simultaneously [67].

• Virus Library Design: A library of barcoded viruses is engineered to contain HAs from a wide diversity of currently circulating human H3N2 and H1N1 strains (e.g., 77 H3N2 and 39 H1N1). Strains are selected based on high local branching index on Nextstrain builds and/or the presence of mutations at known antigenic sites.
• Human Sera Collection and Preparation: Human sera are sourced from individuals of various ages and geographical locations. Sera are treated with receptor-destroying enzyme and heat-inactivated to eliminate non-specific inhibitors.
• Pooled Neutralization Assay: The library of barcoded viruses is pooled and incubated with the prepared human sera. Antibodies in the sera that neutralize a virus will prevent it from infecting cells.
• High-Throughput Sequencing: The virus pool post-incubation is used to infect cells. Viral RNA from infected cells is collected and sequenced. The unique barcodes allow for the quantification of each viral strain's survival.
• Titer Calculation and Data Analysis: Neutralization titers are calculated for each serum against each HA variant by comparing barcode counts to a no-serum control. The resulting data provides a detailed map of which HA variants are most effectively neutralized by current population immunity.

Phylogenetic Workflow for Influenza Vaccine Strain Selection

The following diagram illustrates the integrated workflow from genomic surveillance to vaccine decision, highlighting where phylogenetic analysis and neutralization data intersect.

Diagram 1: Phylogenetic workflow for influenza vaccine strain selection.

HIV Phylogenies: Targeting Within-Host Diversity and the Latent Reservoir

Key Evolutionary Challenges and Phylogenetic Applications

HIV-1 presents a different set of challenges, dominated by its extreme genetic diversity and the establishment of a latent reservoir. Phylogenies are used not for seasonal forecasting, but to understand transmission dynamics, identify circulating recombinant forms (CRFs), and critically, to map the clonal architecture of the latent reservoir within a single individual. HIV-1 group M, responsible for over 95% of global infections, comprises subtypes A through L, with subtype C dominating in sub-Saharan Africa and subtype B in Western Europe and North America [27]. This diversity impacts diagnostic accuracy and drug resistance profiles. Furthermore, during antiretroviral therapy (ART), the virus persists in a small population of long-lived, latently infected CD4+ T cells. Phylogenetic tracking has revealed that this reservoir is often dominated by a few highly expanded clones of infected cells, which can persist for decades and are critical barriers to a cure [69].

Supporting Data on Reservoir Persistence and Diversity

Table 2: Key Characteristics of HIV-1 Shaping Vaccine and Cure Strategies

Characteristic	Impact on Disease Management	Role of Phylogenetic Analysis
High Genetic Diversity (Groups M, N, O, P; subtypes A-L)	Reduces diagnostic accuracy and ART efficacy; necessitates region-specific approaches.	Tracking global subtype distribution and emerging CRFs for public health surveillance.
Latent Reservoir	Prevents cure; leads to viral rebound if ART is stopped.	Mapping integration sites and clonal dynamics to understand reservoir persistence.
Clonal Expansion	Large, long-lived clones with low reactivation rates dominate the reservoir over time.	Revealing negative correlation between clone size and reactivation probability [69].
Cellular Proliferation Drivers	Homeostatic proliferation and antigen-driven stimulation shape the reservoir.	Integrating T cell receptor (TCR) specificity with viral integration site data.

Mathematical models that incorporate clonal heterogeneity show that the latent reservoir's composition shifts over time. A 2025 model found that large clones play a central role in long-term persistence, even though they reactivate rarely, while smaller, more dynamic clones are gradually lost [69]. This stratification by reactivation rate is a key insight for cure strategies.

Core Experimental Protocol: Integration Site Analysis and Latent Reservoir Profiling

This protocol aims to characterize the latent HIV-1 reservoir by identifying where the virus has integrated into the host genome and how these clones expand [70].

• Sample Collection and DNA Extraction: Genomic DNA is extracted from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of ART-treated individuals or elite controllers.
• Integration Site Sequencing: DNA is subjected to ligation-mediated PCR (LM-PCR) to amplify host-virus junction fragments, followed by next-generation sequencing (NGS).
• Bioinformatic Mapping: The resulting sequencing reads are mapped to the human genome (e.g., hg38) to identify precise HIV-1 integration sites.
• Chromatin Context Analysis: Integration site data is compared to chromatin state maps (e.g., from ATAC-seq, ChIP-seq for H3K9me3, H3K27me3) and lamina-associated domains (LADs) to determine if integration is enriched in active or repressive genomic regions.
• Clonal Dynamics and Phylogenetic Inference: Identical integration sites define expanded clones. Phylogenetic trees of HIV sequences from a single host can be used to infer the relationships between these clones and their evolutionary history under immune and drug pressure.

Studies using this protocol have shown that in elite controllers, the immune system preferentially clears cells with proviruses in active genomic regions, leading to a reservoir skewed towards integrations in repressive chromatin and LADs [70].

Phylogenetic and Cellular Model of HIV Latent Reservoir Dynamics

The diagram below models the key biological processes that determine the composition and persistence of the HIV latent reservoir, which can be inferred from phylogenetic data.

Diagram 2: Phylogenetic and cellular model of HIV latent reservoir dynamics.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful research in this field relies on a suite of specialized reagents, databases, and software tools.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Resources for Phylogeny-Guided Vaccine and Drug Target Research

Category	Item	Function and Application
Databases & Tools	GISAID EpiFlu	Primary repository for sharing influenza virus sequences and associated metadata [68].
	Nextstrain	Open-source platform for real-time tracking of pathogen evolution (e.g., 6-month builds for influenza) [67].
	Genome Taxonomy Database (GTDB)	Reference taxonomy for phylogeny-based classification of microbes [71].
Software	Iroki	User-friendly web interface for automatic customization and visualization of phylogenetic trees using metadata [72].
	FigTree	Interactive application for displaying and printing molecular phylogenies [73].
Experimental Kits & Reagents	Receptor-Destroying Enzyme (RDE)	Treats human sera to eliminate non-specific inhibitors before neutralization assays [67].
	Ligation-Mediated PCR (LM-PCR) Kit	For amplifying host-virus DNA junctions in HIV integration site analysis [70].
Cell Lines & Assays	TZM-bl Reporter Cell Line	Engineered HeLa cell line expressing CD4 and CCR5; used to measure HIV infectivity and neutralization [70].
	Viral Outgrowth Assay (VOA)	Gold-standard method to quantify the inducible, replication-competent HIV latent reservoir [69].

The comparative analysis of influenza and HIV phylogenies reveals a fundamental dichotomy in how evolutionary theory is applied to practical public health problems. For influenza, the focus is on predicting population-level evolution to outmaneuver a rapidly changing virus through proactive, population-level vaccine design. For HIV, the focus shifts to decoding within-host evolution and the complex clonal dynamics of a persistent latent reservoir to develop a cure. Both fields are being transformed by high-throughput sequencing, sophisticated phylogenetic modeling, and interactive visualization tools. The future lies in further integrating these data streams—genomic, serological, and clinical—into dynamic models that can not only predict the next seasonal flu strain but also guide personalized strategies to eradicate the last vestiges of HIV from an infected individual.

Navigating Evolutionary Challenges: Drug Resistance, Immune Escape, and Diagnostic Gaps

Overcoming Antigenic Mismatch in Seasonal Influenza Vaccines

The development of effective seasonal influenza vaccines represents a perpetual battle against the rapid evolution of viruses, a challenge that finds both parallels and distinctions in the broader field of viral phylogenetics. While this guide focuses on overcoming antigenic mismatch in influenza, it is instructive to frame this problem within a comparative context with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), another virus with significant global health impact. Both pathogens evolve to escape host immune responses, but they employ fundamentally different evolutionary strategies and operate on distinct timescales. Influenza A/H3N2, in particular, exhibits antigenic drift through point mutations in its surface proteins, necessitating frequent vaccine reformulation [74]. In contrast, HIV maintains a persistent infection and combines high mutation rates with recombination, generating immense diversity within a single host and creating formidable obstacles for vaccine development [75] [27].

The core problem for influenza vaccine effectiveness lies in the antigenic mismatch that occurs when the vaccine strains selected months in advance do not perfectly match the circulating viruses dominant during the actual flu season. Recent seasons, such as 2025-2026 with the emergence of H3N2 subclade K, demonstrate that this variant carries seven key mutations in the hemagglutinin protein relative to the vaccine strain, leading to reduced vaccine reactivity and potentially increased transmission [76] [65]. This guide provides a comparative analysis of the experimental approaches and technological solutions being developed to overcome this persistent challenge, offering researchers a framework for evaluating the next generation of influenza vaccines.

Comparative Evolutionary Dynamics: Influenza versus HIV

Understanding the distinct evolutionary pressures and mechanisms governing influenza and HIV provides crucial insights for vaccine design. The table below summarizes key comparative evolutionary features.

Table 1: Comparative Evolutionary Dynamics of Influenza and HIV

Feature	Influenza Virus	Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)
Primary Evolutionary Mechanism	Antigenic drift (point mutations) and reassortment [74] [77]	High mutation rate and frequent recombination [75] [27]
Evolutionary Rate	Rapid, season-to-season changes [74]	Extremely high, within-host and population-level diversity [27]
Key Vaccine Challenge	Semiannual strain selection and manufacturing lead time [74] [65]	Extensive global genetic diversity (Groups, Subtypes, CRFs) [27]
Dominant Selective Pressure	Population immunity driving antigenic escape [74]	Host immune response and antiretroviral therapy [75]
Impact of Genetic Distance	~4-fold reduction in HI titer with 2 antigenic units of distance [74]	Subtype variation affects disease progression and therapy efficacy [27]

Diagram: Evolutionary Drivers of Antigenic Mismatch

The following diagram illustrates the primary evolutionary and logistical pathways that lead to antigenic mismatch in seasonal influenza vaccines.

Quantitative Assessment of Vaccine Match and Mismatch

Evaluating the degree of antigenic mismatch requires robust experimental protocols and quantitative metrics. Research analyzing 63 influenza seasons between 2002 and 2023 has provided a framework for this assessment, comparing historical World Health Organization (WHO) vaccine strains with hypothetical strains selected using reproducible, data-driven methods [74].

Key Metrics for Assessing Match

The match between a vaccine strain and a circulating virus can be quantified at both the molecular and antigenic levels:

• Molecular Comparison: This involves counting the number of amino acid (AA) differences in classically defined antigenic sites and in specific sites known to result in novel antigenic variants [74]. For example, in the United States across 21 seasons, the median number of epitope AA differences for the WHO vaccine strain was 6 (IQR: 5-10), compared to 4 (IQR: 2-5) for a reproducibly selected strain using the same timing [74].
• Antigenic Comparison: This uses hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay data and antigenic cartography to calculate the antigenic distance between strains. An antigenic distance of two units represents a ≥4-fold reduction in HI titer, a threshold for antigens being considered antigenically distinct [74]. The median antigenic distance between the dominant strain and the WHO vaccine strain was 3.0, compared to 2.17 for the reproducible selection method [74].

Experimental Protocol for Reproducible Strain Selection

A cited study [74] utilized a reproducible, computational method for vaccine strain selection to objectively assess the impact of timing. The core methodology is outlined below.

• Step 1 – Sequence Compilation: Gather all globally available HA sequences from the two months preceding the selection deadline (e.g., December and January for a February Northern Hemisphere selection).
• Step 2 – Consensus Generation: Compute a global consensus amino acid sequence from the compiled data.
• Step 3 – Strain Identification: Select the most similar naturally occurring virus to the global consensus as the proposed vaccine strain.
• Step 4 – Timing Comparison: To evaluate the impact of delayed selection, repeat the process using sequence data from a three-month later period (e.g., March and April for a delayed Northern Hemisphere selection).
• Step 5 – Match Assessment: Compare the historical WHO strain, the reproducible selection strain (standard timing), and the reproducible selection strain (delayed timing) against the season's dominant circulating strain using the molecular and antigenic metrics described above.

Table 2: Impact of Reproducible Strain Selection on Vaccine Match (63 Seasons Analysis) [74]

Region	Selection Method	Median Epitope AA Differences	Seasons with ≥4-fold HI Titer Improvement
United States	WHO Vaccine Strain	6 (IQR: 5-10)	-
	Reproducible Selection (WHO timing)	4 (IQR: 2-5)	4 out of 21 seasons
	Reproducible Selection (Delayed)	4 (IQR: 2-6)	1 additional season
Overall (All Regions)	Reproducible Selection (WHO timing)	Reduced in 51/63 seasons	12 out of 63 seasons
	Reproducible Selection (Delayed)	Further improved in 14/63 seasons	7 additional seasons

Methodologies for Measuring Antigenic Distance

A critical component of assessing vaccine mismatch is the method used to quantify the "distance" between viral strains. Different metrics are available, ranging from complex serological methods to simpler computational approaches.

Comparative Antigenic Distance Metrics

A 2025 study directly compared four methods for measuring antigenic distance to determine their utility in predicting vaccine response breadth [78].

Table 3: Comparison of Antigenic Distance Measurement Metrics [78]

Metric	Description	Data Requirements	Key Finding
Antigenic Cartography	Statistical dimension reduction of serological (HI) data [78]	Extensive serum panels and HI assays [78]	Considered a gold standard but complex and costly [78]
p-Epitope Distance	Sequence-based distance focusing on known antigenic sites [78]	Viral genetic or amino acid sequences [78]	Predictions of response breadth were similar to cartography [78]
Grantham's Distance	Biochemical distance based on amino acid properties [78]	Viral amino acid sequences [78]	Predictions of response breadth were similar to cartography [78]
Temporal Distance	Simple difference in isolation years [78]	Strain isolation date [78]	Predictions of response breadth were similar to cartography [78]

The study concluded that despite only moderate correlation between the metrics, they generated similar predictions regarding the breadth of the immune response to vaccination. This suggests that for many research applications, simpler, low-cost sequence-based or temporal measures can be as informative as the more complex and expensive cartography methods [78].

Diagram: Antigenic Distance Measurement Workflow

The following workflow illustrates the process of measuring antigenic distance using different metrics and evaluating vaccine response.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Advancing research on antigenic mismatch requires a specific set of reagents and tools. The following table details key materials essential for experiments in this field.

Table 4: Research Reagent Solutions for Influenza Vaccine Match Studies

Reagent / Material	Function in Research
Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) Assay	The gold-standard serological assay for measuring antigenic distance between influenza strains by quantifying antibody-mediated inhibition of hemagglutination [74] [78].
Post-Infection Ferret Antisera	Used as a standardized source of antibodies in HI assays to evaluate the antigenic relatedness of new viral variants to vaccine strains [76] [65].
Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS)	Enables rapid and high-throughput sequencing of circulating influenza virus genomes for phylogenetic analysis and identification of emerging mutations [27].
Global Influenza Surveillance Data (GISAID)	International database providing access to influenza virus sequences and associated metadata, essential for consensus generation and tracking global spread [76].
Phylogenetic Analysis Software (e.g., HyPhy, MEGA)	Open-source tools for constructing phylogenetic trees, identifying transmission clusters, and analyzing evolutionary dynamics [79].
Antigenic Cartography Software	Computational tools for performing dimensional reduction on HI titer data to visualize and quantify antigenic distances between viruses [78].

The continuous evolutionary arms race between influenza viruses and the human immune system makes the problem of antigenic mismatch a persistent one. Current research demonstrates that improvements to the existing strain selection process, such as the use of reproducible computational methods and the potential for delayed timelines enabled by novel vaccine platforms, could enhance vaccine match in a majority of seasons [74]. The emergence of H3N2 subclade K in the 2025-2026 season is a real-world testament to the ongoing nature of this challenge [76] [65].

The future of overcoming antigenic mismatch lies in two complementary strategies: First, the adoption of faster vaccine production technologies (e.g., mRNA and recombinant platforms) that can shorten manufacturing lead times, allowing selection decisions to be made closer to the flu season with more accurate surveillance data [74] [65]. Second, the pursuit of broadly protective or universal influenza vaccines that target conserved viral epitopes less susceptible to antigenic drift, thereby reducing the dependency on precise seasonal strain prediction [78]. As the field progresses, the lessons learned from the comparative evolutionary dynamics of viruses like HIV, particularly regarding immune escape and the management of diversity, will continue to provide valuable insights for the next generation of influenza vaccines.

Combating Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) Resistance and Treatment Failure in HIV

The ongoing battle against antiretroviral therapy (ART) resistance in HIV is fundamentally a battle against viral evolution. Understanding the evolutionary dynamics of HIV, particularly when compared to other rapidly evolving viruses like influenza, provides a critical framework for developing effective long-term treatment and prevention strategies. While both viruses exhibit high mutation rates, their evolutionary trajectories and phylogenetic patterns differ significantly. Influenza viruses, particularly H3N2, often display a single, dominant "trunk" lineage in their phylogenies, with sequential replacement of strains over time [80]. In contrast, HIV-1 phylogenies are characterized by greater topological balance and the sustained co-circulation of multiple, divergent lineages without a single dominant trunk [80]. This "star-like" phylogeny reflects the establishment of multiple successful transmission chains that evolve independently. These distinct evolutionary behaviors have direct implications for how drug resistance emerges and spreads in global populations. For HIV, this results in a complex landscape where numerous resistant variants can arise independently and persist, complicating efforts to maintain treatment efficacy on a global scale.

Current Landscape of ART Resistance and Treatment Failure

Global and Regional Trends in Drug Resistance

Recent surveillance data from 2018 to 2024 indicates a promising decline in the prevalence of resistance to most antiretroviral drug classes in the United States. This trend is observed in both plasma RNA and proviral DNA sequences, consistent with the increased use of regimens with higher genetic barriers to resistance, improved tolerability, and more convenient dosing [81]. Despite this encouraging trend, significant challenges remain. The World Health Organization (WHO) notes that the emergence of acquired resistance to dolutegravir (DTG)—the cornerstone of first- and second-line ART—may be higher than initially anticipated, particularly in individuals with extensive prior treatment experience [82]. In some low- and middle-income settings, studies report DTG resistance prevalence among individuals with detectable viraemia ranging from 3.9% to 19.6% [82].

Treatment failure rates show substantial geographic variation. A 2025 systematic review of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region found virological failure rates ranging from 21.5% to 85.6%, depending on the viral load thresholds used and the populations studied [83]. The prevalence of drug resistance among those experiencing failure in this region varied from 48% to 86% [83], highlighting significant gaps in treatment optimization and monitoring.

Table 1: Recent Trends in HIV-1 Drug Resistance Prevalence (2018-2024)

Drug Class	Resistance Trend (2018-2024)	2024 RNA Prevalence	2024 DNA Prevalence	Key Mutations Noted
NRTI + NNRTI	Declining	3.5% (from 6.1%)	7.8% (from 12.1%)	—
INSTI	Declining	—	—	R263K increasing
Rilpivirine	Remained low	6.3%	10.2%	—
Doravirine	Remained low	2.0%	2.9%	—

Factors Contributing to Treatment Failure

Treatment failure is a multifactorial challenge. Analysis from the MENA region identified several key determinants of suboptimal treatment outcomes [83]:

• Patient factors: Younger age, male sex, unemployment, and poor adherence to medication.
• Clinical factors: Higher baseline viral load, lower CD4 count at initiation, and coadministration of antituberculosis therapy.
• Structural factors: Receiving care outside major cities, leading to challenges in access and continuity.

Notably, the prevalence of dual-class and triple-class resistance is higher in older adults (aged 60-90 years), with NRTI+NNRTI resistance reaching 14.1% in DNA sequences for this age group, compared to only 3.8% for those aged 18-39 years [81]. This suggests a cumulative effect of prior exposure to less robust regimens in earlier decades of the epidemic.

Methodologies for Monitoring and Studying Resistance

Surveillance Systems and Genotypic Resistance Testing

Robust surveillance systems are fundamental to tracking HIV drug resistance trends. The CDC's Cyclical Acquired HIV Drug Resistance Surveillance (CADRE) system provides a model for laboratory-based monitoring, using existing laboratory networks to conduct genetic testing on leftover viral load specimens [84]. This system is particularly focused on DTG-based regimens, which constitute 92% of ART provided through PEPFAR [84].

Standard genotypic resistance testing (GRT) methodologies include:

• Plasma RNA GRT: Typically uses Sanger sequencing, with bidirectional reads assembled to an HIV-1 subtype B consensus sequence. This method has been the standard of care for over 25 years [81].
• Proviral DNA GRT: Often employs next-generation sequencing (NGS) with a minority variant cutoff (commonly 10-20%) on platforms like Illumina MiSeq. NGS reads are typically filtered for likely defective viral reads (stop codons, frameshifts, etc.) before mapping to a reference and variant calling [81].

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents and Platforms for HIV Drug Resistance Studies

Reagent/Platform	Function/Application	Example Use in Resistance Research
Illumina MiSeq Platform	Next-generation sequencing	Proviral DNA sequencing for archived resistance
Stanford HIVdb Algorithm	Interpretation of genotypic resistance	Scoring mutations (score ≥30 indicates resistance)
Hypermut 2.0 Algorithm	Identification of APOBEC-mediated hypermutation	Filtering out defective sequences from analysis
Exatype Bioinformatics Pipeline	NGS data analysis and variant calling	Mapping reads to HXB-2 reference
PhyML Software	Phylogenetic inference	Constructing maximum likelihood trees

The following workflow diagram illustrates the core process for conducting HIV drug resistance surveillance and analysis, integrating both RNA and DNA testing modalities:

Figure 1: HIV Drug Resistance Surveillance Workflow. This diagram outlines the core process for genotypic resistance testing, incorporating both plasma RNA and proviral DNA methodologies, culminating in surveillance systems that inform treatment guidelines.

Experimental Models for Studying Resistance Evolution

Research into resistance mechanisms employs both clinical data and experimental models. In vitro measurements of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase fidelity indicate a forward mutation rate of approximately 3 × 10⁻⁵ mutations per target base pair per replication cycle [85]. The high mutation rate is primarily attributed to the absence of 3'→5' exonucleolytic proofreading activity in HIV-1 RT [85].

The viral fitness of resistant variants plays a crucial role in their persistence in populations. The concept of lethal mutagenesis—using mutagenic nucleotide analogs to push viral mutation rates beyond the error threshold—has been explored as an alternative therapeutic strategy [85]. Compounds like 5-hydroxy-2'-deoxycytidine (5-OH-dC) have been investigated for this purpose, requiring metabolic activation to their triphosphate forms by cellular kinases before incorporation into viral DNA by HIV-1 RT [85].

Emerging Therapeutic Strategies to Combat Resistance

Novel Antiretroviral Agents and Regimens

The therapeutic arsenal against HIV continues to evolve with agents that possess higher genetic barriers to resistance and novel mechanisms of action:

• Lenacapavir: A first-in-class capsid inhibitor with a multi-stage mechanism of action distinguishable from other approved classes. It is designed to inhibit HIV at multiple stages of its lifecycle and has no known cross-resistance exhibited in vitro to other drug classes [86]. It is being investigated as both twice-yearly subcutaneous injection and long-acting oral formulation.
• Bictegravir: A potent integrase strand transfer inhibitor with a high resistance barrier. Real-world data from the BICSTaR study show sustained viral suppression and a favorable safety profile over five years in both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced individuals [86].
• Doravirine/Islatravir combination: An investigational once-daily, two-drug regimen currently under FDA review. Phase 3 trials show non-inferior efficacy to bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide with beneficial effects on weight and lipid profiles [87].

Long-Acting Formulations and Combination Therapies

Long-acting antiretrovirals represent a paradigm shift in HIV management, potentially enhancing adherence and reducing the risk of resistance development:

• Cabotegravir + Rilpivirine: A long-acting injectable regimen administered every two months.
• Investigational weekly oral regimen: Combining islatravir and lenacapavir, with Phase 2 data showing 88.5% of adults maintaining undetectable viral load at 96 weeks [86].
• Twice-yearly complete regimen: Combining lenacapavir with broadly neutralizing antibodies (teropavimab and zinlirvimab), with Phase 2 results showing maintained viral suppression at 52 weeks [86].

The following diagram illustrates the multi-stage mechanism of action of Lenacapavir, representing the novel class of capsid inhibitors:

Figure 2: Multi-stage Mechanism of Lenacapavir. Unlike most antivirals that act on a single stage of viral replication, the capsid inhibitor lenacapavir is designed to inhibit HIV at multiple stages of its lifecycle, contributing to its high genetic barrier to resistance.

Discussion: Integrating Evolutionary Insights into Resistance Management

The comparative evolutionary framework of HIV versus influenza offers valuable insights for combating ART resistance. The phylogenetic properties of HIV—specifically its balanced trees and persistent diversity—suggest that resistant variants, once emerged, are likely to persist in the viral population rather than be replaced by new dominant strains [80]. This contrasts with influenza, where antigenic drift often leads to the sequential replacement of dominant strains. For HIV management, this implies that resistance monitoring must track a diverse and expanding set of variants rather than anticipating sequential sweeps.

The decline in overall resistance prevalence from 2018 to 2024 [81] suggests that modern ART regimens are effectively suppressing the emergence of new resistance, yet the increased R263K integrase mutation [81] demonstrates the ongoing evolutionary potential of HIV. This mutation pattern, observed against a background of declining overall INSTI resistance, exemplifies the complex evolutionary dynamics at play.

The promising field of long-acting antiretrovirals offers the potential to dramatically reduce adherence-related treatment failures, a significant contributor to resistance. However, the unique pharmacological properties of these agents necessitate careful management to prevent the emergence of resistance during extended drug exposure periods. For instance, individuals acquiring HIV while using long-acting cabotegravir for PrEP may carry virus resistant to dolutegravir [82], highlighting the need for thorough screening before initiation.

Combating ART resistance and treatment failure in HIV requires a multi-faceted approach that integrates deep understanding of viral evolution, robust surveillance systems, and continuous therapeutic innovation. The declining trends in resistance for most drug classes are encouraging and reflect the success of modern ART regimens with higher genetic barriers to resistance. However, the emergence of specific resistance patterns, particularly for integrase inhibitors and in special populations, demands sustained vigilance.

Future strategies must leverage long-acting formulations to address adherence challenges, novel therapeutic classes like capsid inhibitors to circumvent existing resistance pathways, and enhanced global surveillance to rapidly detect and respond to emerging resistance threats. By framing this work within the comparative evolutionary biology of rapidly mutating viruses, researchers and drug developers can anticipate resistance pathways and design more durable solutions to maintain the long-term effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy.

Addressing the Impact of HIV's Extreme Genetic Diversity on Diagnostic Accuracy

The extraordinary genetic diversity of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) presents a formidable challenge in the ongoing global effort to control the HIV/AIDS pandemic. This diversity, driven by an error-prone reverse transcriptase and high rates of viral recombination, has direct implications for diagnostic accuracy, treatment monitoring, and public health surveillance [88]. Unlike influenza, whose evolutionary patterns follow seasonal and predictable antigenic drift, HIV's evolution occurs within each infected individual, generating a complex quasispecies that can differ significantly across geographic regions and populations [88] [89].

The comparative evolutionary analysis between influenza and HIV reveals distinct phylogenetic patterns: while influenza phylogenies demonstrate clear temporal structure with seasonal global replacements of dominant strains, HIV phylogenies show persistent co-circulation of multiple subtypes and recombinant forms with complex geographical structuring [88] [90]. This fundamental difference in evolutionary dynamics necessitates distinct diagnostic approaches. For influenza, diagnostics can be updated annually based on surveillance predictions; for HIV, diagnostics must account for tremendous simultaneous diversity, creating persistent challenges for assay developers and clinical providers alike [91].

The implications of this diversity are not merely theoretical. Studies demonstrate that commercially available assays show reduced sensitivity for divergent HIV strains, potentially leading to false-negative results, delayed diagnosis, and ongoing transmission [88]. Furthermore, the global distribution of HIV subtypes is increasingly dynamic, with non-B subtypes now accounting for >20% of new diagnoses in Western Europe and North America, regions historically dominated by subtype B [88]. This shifting landscape demands continuous monitoring and diagnostic refinement to maintain accuracy across all viral variants.

The Evolving Global Landscape of HIV-1 Diversity

Molecular Epidemiology and Geographic Distribution

HIV-1's genetic diversity is organized into distinct phylogenetic patterns. The virus is categorized into four groups: M (major), N (non-M, non-O), O (outlier), and P. Group M, responsible for the global pandemic, contains multiple subtypes (A-D, F-H, J, K) and numerous circulating recombinant forms (CRFs) that arise from recombination between subtypes in dually infected individuals [88] [90]. This complex diversity stems from multiple zoonotic transmissions of simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIVs) from chimpanzees and gorillas to humans in the early 20th century, followed by decades of global spread and viral adaptation [88].

Contemporary surveillance data reveals the striking heterogeneity of HIV-1's global distribution. A 2025 systematic review and meta-analysis encompassing 84,622 genotyped samples from men who have sex with men (MSM) populations globally found CRF01AE (34.46%), subtype B (31.16%), and CRF07BC (24.72%) to be the predominant strains worldwide [90]. However, these global figures mask significant regional variations that directly impact diagnostic strategy development.

Table 1: Global Distribution of Predominant HIV-1 Subtypes and Recombinant Forms

Geographic Region	Predominant Subtypes/CRFs	Regional Prevalence Trends
Asia and China	CRF01AE, CRF07BC	CRF07_BC shows consistent year-on-year increase [90]
Latin America & Europe	Subtype B	Subtype B shows declining trend over years [90]
Africa & Middle East	Subtype C, CRF02_AG	Maintains stable dominance with complex recombinants [90]
South Korea	Subtype B (50.7%), various CRFs	Subtype B decreasing annually (p=0.047) [92]

The distribution of HIV-1 subtypes demonstrates dynamic temporal trends. Longitudinal analyses reveal that subtype B and C have shown declining prevalence over recent years, while CRF07_BC has exhibited consistent year-on-year increases [90]. In South Korea, once dominated by subtype B, the proportion of this subtype has decreased significantly from 70.7% during 2018-2019 to 42.1% in 2023, with a corresponding increase in recombinant forms to 53.4% [92]. This rapid shift toward recombinant forms underscores the necessity for diagnostics that can accurately detect an expanding array of viral variants.

Drivers of Diversity and Diagnostic Implications

The molecular mechanisms underlying HIV's diversity are well-characterized and contribute directly to diagnostic challenges. The virus exhibits a high mutation rate of approximately ~10⁻⁵ mutations per base per replication cycle, combined with frequent recombination events during reverse transcription [88]. These processes continuously generate novel variants that can differ significantly from the reference strains used in diagnostic assay development.

The diagnostic implications of this diversity are profound. Subtype-specific genetic variations can affect primer binding sites for nucleic acid tests, antibody epitopes for serological assays, and target antigens for rapid tests [88]. This variability can lead to:

• Reduced sensitivity in viral load quantification for non-B subtypes
• Differential performance in point-of-care tests across geographic regions
• Delayed seroconversion detection in some subtypes
• False-negative results with divergent strains

The increasing globalization and human mobility have further complicated the diagnostic landscape, as regions previously dominated by a single subtype now encounter increasingly diverse viral populations, necessitating diagnostic approaches that maintain performance across this expanding genetic spectrum [88] [92].

Comparative Analysis of Diagnostic Technologies

Laboratory-Based HIV Diagnostics

Traditional HIV diagnostic algorithms have relied on laboratory-based technologies including enzyme immunoassays (EIAs), Western blots, and nucleic acid tests (NATs). These established methods represent the historical gold standard but face increasing challenges in the context of growing viral diversity.

Table 2: Performance Comparison of HIV Diagnostic Platforms

Diagnostic Technology	Mechanism of Detection	Strengths	Limitations for Diverse Subtypes
Fourth Generation Lab Assays	Detects HIV IgG/IgM antibodies and p24 antigen	High sensitivity for established infection; reduced window period	Reduced sensitivity for divergent strains; requires lab infrastructure [88]
Point-of-Care Rapid Tests	Lateral flow immunochromatography for antibody detection	Rapid results (15-30 min); minimal infrastructure	Variable performance across subtypes; lower sensitivity in acute infection [91]
HIV-1 NAT Quantitative	Target amplification of conserved viral sequences	Gold standard for early detection; viral load monitoring	Subtype-dependent variation in quantification accuracy [88]
Microcantilever Biosensor	Nanomechanical deflection upon antigen binding	Rapid (minutes); detects p24 antigen; portable	Requires validation across diverse subtypes [91]

Laboratory-based p24 antigen detection remains a crucial component for early diagnosis during the acute infection phase, but its performance can be affected by subtype-specific sequence variations that alter antibody binding epitopes [88]. Similarly, nucleic acid tests targeting highly conserved regions may still demonstrate subtype-dependent quantification biases, potentially affecting clinical management decisions in regions with diverse subtypes [88]. These limitations highlight the critical need for continuous monitoring of diagnostic performance across all circulating variants.

Emerging Platforms and Innovations

Novel diagnostic approaches are emerging to address the challenges posed by HIV's genetic diversity. A groundbreaking nanomechanical microcantilever platform developed at Northwestern University represents a significant advancement in point-of-care testing technology [91]. This innovative approach functionalizes silicon cantilevers with broadly cross-reactive antibodies (ANT-152 and C65690M) specifically selected to recognize conserved epitopes across diverse HIV-1 subtypes [91].

The microcantilever technology demonstrates several advantages over conventional approaches:

• Direct antigen detection without nucleic acid amplification
• Rapid results in minutes rather than hours or days
• Minimal infrastructure requirements, potentially operable with solar power
• Multiplexing capability for simultaneous detection of HIV, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C antigens

This platform addresses viral diversity through strategic antibody selection targeting conserved regions, potentially overcoming the subtype-dependent performance variations that plague many current diagnostic assays [91]. The technology has demonstrated efficacy in detecting p24 antigen even at low concentrations in complex human blood samples, suggesting potential for both early detection and reliable diagnosis across diverse viral subtypes [91].

Experimental Approaches for Evaluating Diagnostic Accuracy

Assessing Cross-Subtype Reactivity

Rigorous evaluation of diagnostic performance across HIV subtypes requires standardized experimental methodologies. The following protocol outlines a comprehensive approach for assessing cross-subtype reactivity of HIV diagnostic assays:

Protocol 1: Evaluation of Diagnostic Assay Performance Across HIV Subtypes

• Sample Panel Preparation:

  • Create a reference panel representing major HIV-1 subtypes (A, B, C, D, F, G, H) and CRFs (01AE, 02AG, 07_BC)
  • Include well-characterized clinical isolates or viral culture supernatants with quantified viral load
  • Incorporate dilution series to determine limit of detection for each subtype

• Assay Validation:

  • Test all samples in triplicate across multiple lots of the diagnostic assay
  • Include appropriate controls (negative, low-positive, high-positive)
  • Perform testing blinded to sample identity to minimize bias

• Data Analysis:

  • Calculate sensitivity, specificity, and limit of detection for each subtype
  • Determine statistical significance of performance variations across subtypes
  • Evaluate correlation with gold standard reference methods

This systematic approach enables comprehensive assessment of how genetic diversity impacts diagnostic accuracy and identifies potential subtype-specific performance limitations [88] [91].

Advanced Molecular Characterization

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have revolutionized the monitoring of HIV diversity and its impact on diagnostics. The following workflow illustrates the integration of NGS into diagnostic evaluation:

Diagram 1: NGS HIV Diagnostic Evaluation Workflow

This integrated approach enables near real-time surveillance of emerging variants and their potential impact on diagnostic accuracy. By directly linking viral genetic data with diagnostic performance metrics, researchers can identify specific mutations or subtypes that compromise assay effectiveness and rapidly implement corrective actions [88].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Advancing HIV diagnostics in the face of extreme genetic diversity requires specialized research tools and reagents. The following table catalogs essential materials for development and evaluation of HIV diagnostics capable of detecting diverse subtypes.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for HIV Diagnostic Development

Research Reagent	Specific Examples	Application in Diagnostic Development
Broadly Cross-Reactive Antibodies	ANT-152, C65690M [91]	Target conserved epitopes across diverse subtypes for antigen detection tests
Reference Viral Strains	WHO International Reference Reagents	Standardization and calibration of assays across subtypes
Clinical Sample Panels	FDA HIV Serological Panel, NIBSC Panels	Validate assay performance across subtypes and geographic regions
Next-Generation Sequencing Kits	Illumina, Oxford Nanopore Technologies	Comprehensive characterization of viral diversity and identification of diagnostic escape variants
Quantitative PCR Assays	Multiplex assays targeting conserved regions	Viral load monitoring across diverse subtypes with minimized quantification bias
Recombinant Antigens	Recombinant gp41, p24, integrase	Development of serological assays with broad subtype recognition

These research reagents enable systematic evaluation of how genetic variation impacts diagnostic performance and facilitate the development of assays that maintain accuracy across diverse viral subtypes. The inclusion of broadly cross-reactive antibodies is particularly critical for antigen detection tests, as these reagents target conserved epitopes less susceptible to genetic variation [91]. Similarly, comprehensive reference panels representing global diversity are essential for validating assay performance before deployment in diverse epidemiological contexts.

Future Directions and Strategic Recommendations

The continuing evolution of HIV demands equally evolving diagnostic strategies. Several promising approaches may address the persistent challenge of viral diversity:

First, multi-target diagnostic approaches that simultaneously detect multiple viral antigens or conserved nucleic acid regions can compensate for sequence variation in any single target. The microcantilever technology demonstrating detection of multiple HIV antigens represents an important step in this direction [91].

Second, point-of-care nucleic acid tests that leverage isothermal amplification methods could provide the sensitivity of NATs with the accessibility of rapid tests. Coupling these platforms with carefully designed primer sets targeting ultra-conserved regions could maintain performance across subtypes while expanding testing access.

Third, artificial intelligence-driven prediction of emerging variants could enable proactive diagnostic updates before new strains become widespread. By analyzing global sequence databases and identifying evolutionary trends, assay developers could anticipate diagnostic challenges and develop countermeasures.

Finally, standardized cross-subtype validation requirements for regulatory approval would ensure that new diagnostics demonstrate adequate performance across all major subtypes before deployment. This would prevent the introduction of assays with significant subtype-dependent performance limitations.

The fundamental phylogenetic differences between HIV and influenza underscore why distinct diagnostic strategies are necessary. While influenza's relatively predictable evolution enables annual diagnostic and vaccine updates, HIV's continuous diversification requires diagnostics with inherent breadth of reactivity. Success in ending the HIV pandemic will depend, in part, on developing diagnostic strategies that acknowledge and address the implications of the virus's extraordinary genetic diversity.

Managing Co-infections and the Emergence of Inter-Group Recombinant Forms (e.g., HIV-1/MO)

In the evolutionary arms race between viruses and their hosts, genetic recombination and reassortment serve as pivotal mechanisms for rapid viral adaptation and diversification. This is particularly true for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and influenza A virus (IAV), two pathogens of profound global health significance. While both viruses leverage genetic exchange to evade host immunity and intervention strategies, they do so through distinct molecular mechanisms rooted in their unique replication architectures. HIV, a retrovirus with a diploid RNA genome, utilizes homologous recombination during reverse transcription, a process often described as a form of primitive sexual reproduction [93]. In contrast, influenza A, with its segmented genome, undergoes reassortment, where entire gene segments are exchanged during co-infection [94]. The emergence of inter-group recombinants, such as the documented HIV-1/MO recombinant from an undiagnosed HIV-1/M+O co-infection, underscores the critical challenge that viral genetic exchange poses for disease management and drug development [95]. This guide objectively compares the experimental approaches and performance of various methods used to study, detect, and manage these complex events, providing a structured resource for researchers and therapeutic developers operating at this challenging frontier.

Fundamental Mechanisms of Viral Genetic Exchange

The processes of recombination and reassortment are fundamental to understanding the evolutionary dynamics of HIV and Influenza. The table below summarizes the core mechanisms and their biological consequences.

Table 1: Core Mechanisms of Genetic Exchange in HIV and Influenza A Virus

Feature	HIV (Recombination)	Influenza A Virus (Reassortment)
Genetic Structure	Diploid, two copies of non-segmented RNA genome [93]	Segmented, eight single-stranded RNA segments [94]
Molecular Mechanism	Template switching by reverse transcriptase during cDNA synthesis ("copy-choice") [96] [93]	Exchange of entire genomic RNA segments during co-packaging [94]
Prerequisite Event	Cellular co-infection by distinct viral strains leading to heterozygote virions [96] [93]	Cellular co-infection by distinct viral strains [94]
Evolutionary Consequence	Generation of chimeric genomes; allows escape from Muller's Ratchet and "evolutionary broad jumping" [93]	Generation of novel viral subtypes with pandemic potential (e.g., 2009 H1N1) [97] [94]
Key Viral Factor	Reverse Transcriptase processivity [93]	Packaging signals and compatibility of segments [94]

The following diagram illustrates the generalized experimental workflow for detecting and characterizing these viral recombination and reassortment events, from sample collection to final validation.

Diagram 1: Workflow for detecting viral genetic exchange.

Experimental Approaches for Detection and Characterization

Detecting and characterizing recombinant viruses requires a multifaceted approach, combining advanced sequencing, phylogenetic methods, and computational biology.

Phylogenetic Incongruence Analysis

The cornerstone of recombination/reassortment detection is the identification of discordant phylogenetic relationships across different parts of the viral genome. This involves constructing separate phylogenetic trees for each gene or segment and looking for statistically supported conflicts in clustering patterns [98] [94]. For instance, a virus whose gag gene clusters with subtype A but whose env gene clusters with subtype D is a strong candidate for a recombinant. Methods for quantifying this involve calculating Mean Pairwise Distances (MPD) within and between clades and using algorithms to define distinct "detailed types" or clades for each segment, which form the basis for genotype nomenclature [94].

Clade Assignment and Genotype Nomenclature

A systematic approach, as employed in large-scale influenza studies, involves classifying each genomic segment into clades based on phylogenetic trees. The genotype of a virus is then defined as the sequential combination of the clades for each of its segments (e.g., PB2292, PB1415, PA333, HA422, NP463, NA405, MP369, NS406 for an H7N9 virus) [94]. A reassortment event is identified when a virus genome exhibits a mix of segments from genotypes that are otherwise distinct, provided they share related epidemiological contexts (host, location, time) [94].

In Vitro Recombination Assays

Controlled laboratory experiments are crucial for quantifying recombination frequency and understanding its mechanisms. One powerful method uses marked viral genomes with different, complementary mutations in a reporter gene (e.g., GFP).

Table 2: Key Components of an In Vitro Recombination Assay

Component	Function & Description	Example from Literature
Full-length Viral Vectors	Near-full-length HIV-1 or HIV-2 clones with functional genes but mutated marker genes.	HIV-1-based pON-H0 and pON-T6; HIV-2-based pHIV2-H0G and pHIV2-T6G [96].
Inactivated Reporter Gene	A gene (e.g., GFP) with different inactivating mutations on each vector.	GFP with three stop codons (1-H0G) vs. GFP with a +1 frameshift mutation (1-T6G) [96].
Cell Culture System	Permissive cell line for co-transfection/co-infection and viral propagation.	293T (human embryonic fibroblast) and Hut/CCR5 (human T-cell) lines [96].
Flow Cytometry	Detection and sorting of cells infected with viruses where recombination has restored a functional reporter gene.	Used to detect and isolate GFP-positive cells after infection with heterozygous virions [96].

The experimental workflow for such an assay is detailed below, from vector design to the final analysis of recombinant progeny.

Diagram 2: In vitro recombination assay workflow.

In one such study, researchers demonstrated that HIV-1 and HIV-2 RNAs could be copackaged and recombine, albeit at a low frequency of approximately 0.2% of infection events, which is about 35-fold lower than intra-subtype HIV-1 recombination rates [96]. The isolated recombinant proviruses were then characterized by mapping recombination junctions via DNA sequencing.

Comparative Data: Recombination and Reassortment Frequencies

The frequency and impact of genetic exchange differ significantly between HIV and Influenza, shaped by their distinct biological mechanisms. The following table synthesizes quantitative findings from key studies.

Table 3: Comparative Quantitative Data on HIV Recombination and IAV Reassortment

Virus System	Event Type	Frequency / Incidence	Key Findings and Implications
HIV-1 vs. HIV-2	Inter-type Recombination	~0.2% of infection events (35x lower than HIV-1 intra-subtype) [96]	Demonstrates significant genetic barriers; however, large co-infected population (est. 1 million) makes events possible [96].
HIV-1 Group M	Intra-subtype Recombination	1-3 events/genome/generation [98]	A primary driver of global diversity, contributing to immune evasion and potential drug resistance [98] [93].
Influenza A H1N1	Intra-subtype Reassortment	Multiple events since 1918 [97]	Reassortment linked to abrupt antigenic shifts in 1947 and 1951 epidemics [97].
IAVs (Multiple)	Reassortment Network	1,927 possible events identified in systematic genome analysis [94]	Swine confirmed as a key intermediate "mixing vessel" host for reassortment between avian and human viruses [94].

Progress in this field relies on a specific set of biological, chemical, and computational tools. The following table details key resources for researchers studying viral recombination and reassortment.

Table 4: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Viral Recombination Studies

Category / Solution	Function / Application	Specific Examples / Notes
Full-length Molecular Clones	Provide defined, engineered viral backbones for in vitro recombination assays and reverse genetics systems.	HIV-1 pNL4-3 derived vectors (e.g., pON-H0, pON-T6); HIV-2 ROD-12 derived vectors [96].
Cell Culture Systems	Support viral replication, co-infection experiments, and production of heterozygous virions.	Hut/CCR5 (T-cell line), 293T (packaging cell line) [96].
Pla smid DNA Preparation	Source of high-quality, functional viral clones and accessory genes for transfection.	Access to reliable plasmid DNA sources is often a limiting factor for genetic medicines research [99].
Flow Cytometry & Cell Sorting	Enables detection, quantification, and isolation of cells infected with recombinant viruses based on reporter gene expression.	Used with antibodies against surface markers (HSA, Thy1.2) and GFP [96].
Sequence Databases & Tools	Provide reference data, genome sequences, and analytical pipelines for phylogenetic and recombination analysis.	Los Alamos HIV Database (>300,000 sequences), NCBI IAV Resources (40,296 genomes in one study) [98] [94].
Phylogenetic Software	Reconstruct evolutionary relationships and detect phylogenetic incongruence signaling recombination.	IQ-TREE, PhyloSuite, methods based on Mean Pairwise Distance (MPD) for clade assignment [94].

The management of viral co-infections and the emergent threat of inter-group recombinant forms represent a complex and moving target for modern medicine. The experimental and comparative data presented here underscore that while the mechanisms differ—homologous recombination in HIV versus genome reassortment in Influenza—the outcome is the same: the relentless generation of viral diversity that challenges diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. For drug development professionals, this reality necessitates a proactive and evolutionary-aware approach. Vigilant genomic surveillance, advanced phylogenetic tools, and robust in vitro models are non-negotiable components of the research pipeline. Furthermore, the development of next-generation therapies, including broad-spectrum antivirals and universal vaccines, must account for and even target the very mechanisms of viral genetic exchange. As evidenced by the emergence of HIV-1/MO and the pandemic history of influenza, understanding and managing viral recombination is not merely an academic exercise but a critical frontier in global public health.

Optimizing Surveillance Systems for Early Detection of Variants of Concern (VOCs) and Circulating Recombinant Forms (CRFs)

The continuous evolution of viruses like influenza and HIV represents a significant challenge to global public health. The emergence of Variants of Concern (VOCs) and Circulating Recombinant Forms (CRFs) can potentially alter transmission dynamics, disease severity, and the effectiveness of diagnostic tools, therapeutics, and vaccines [100] [101]. For influenza viruses, VOCs typically arise through antigenic drift and reassortment, while for HIV, their diversity is characterized by multiple subtypes, CRFs, and Unique Recombinant Forms (URFs) [100] [102]. Effective surveillance systems are therefore paramount for the early detection of these novel variants to inform public health responses. This guide provides a comparative analysis of surveillance strategies for influenza and HIV, framed within the context of their distinct evolutionary phylogenies. It objectively compares the performance of different genomic surveillance methodologies, supported by experimental data and detailed protocols, to aid researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals in optimizing their surveillance approaches.

Comparative Evolution of Influenza and HIV Phylogenies

The evolutionary dynamics of influenza and HIV, while both driven by selective pressures, differ significantly in their mechanisms and implications for surveillance.

• Influenza Virus Evolution: Influenza A viruses possess a segmented genome, which allows for rapid evolution through both point mutations (antigenic drift) and reassortment of genome segments between co-infecting viruses (antigenic shift) [102] [101]. This facilitates the emergence of novel strains with pandemic potential. Phylogeographic studies, such as those in sub-Saharan Africa, reveal that influenza spreads as a temporally structured migrating metapopulation, with multiple introductions, local persistence, and export between regions [102]. For instance, the 2024/2025 influenza season in the United States was marked by intense activity of influenza A(H3N2) and A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses [103] [104].

• HIV Evolution: HIV's evolution is characterized by rapid mutation and frequent recombination between different subtypes or CRFs during reverse transcription. This generates extensive genetic diversity, including URFs. A 2025 study in Anhui Province, China, identified five novel URFs among newly infected individuals, which were recombinants of established CRFs like CRF01AE, CRF07BC, and CRF08_BC [100]. The identification of URFs indicates ongoing transmission of multiple HIV-1 clades and highlights the critical need for surveillance that can detect such complex recombination events [100].

Table 1: Key Evolutionary Characteristics of Influenza and HIV

Feature	Influenza Virus	HIV-1
Genetic Structure	Segmented, single-stranded RNA	Non-segmented, single-stranded RNA
Primary Mechanisms of Diversification	Antigenic drift, reassortment (antigenic shift)	Mutation, recombination
Major Outputs of Evolution	Antigenic variants, novel subtypes	Subtypes, Circulating Recombinant Forms (CRFs), Unique Recombinant Forms (URFs)
Typical Surveillance Focus	Seasonal drift variants, emerging reassortants	Drug resistance mutations, novel recombinants

Surveillance System Performance: A Comparative Analysis

Surveillance systems for VOCs and CRFs rely on a foundation of epidemiological and virological data. The performance and findings of these systems for influenza and HIV differ based on their respective evolutionary pressures.

National Influenza Surveillance – The US CDC Model

The US CDC's influenza surveillance system provides a robust example of integrated monitoring. Its key updates for Week 45 of 2025 show how such a system tracks activity and characterizes viruses [103].

• Epidemiological Monitoring: The system tracks national activity levels, hospitalizations, and mortality. For example, as of November 2025, seasonal influenza activity was reported as low but increasing, primarily among children [103].
• Virological Surveillance: Clinical laboratories test respiratory specimens to determine the percentage positive for influenza, which is a key indicator of community spread. Public health laboratories then perform detailed genetic and antigenic characterization on a subset of positive samples to identify subtypes and assess similarity to vaccine strains [103].

Table 2: Example U.S. Influenza Virologic Surveillance Data (CDC Week 45, 2025)

Surveillance Component	Data	Details
Clinical Laboratories	No. of specimens tested: 42,928	Positive specimens: 867 (2.0%)
Virus Type Distribution	Influenza A: 779 (89.9%)Influenza B: 88 (10.1%)	-
Public Health Laboratories (Subtyping)	Influenza A subtyped: 53	A(H1N1)pdm09: 15 (28.3%)A(H3N2): 38 (71.7%)
Virus Characterization	514 viruses genetically characterized	A/H1: 273; A/H3: 124; B/Victoria: 117

HIV Surveillance – Detecting Recombinants in China

HIV surveillance must be designed to capture complex recombination events. A 2025 study in Anhui Province, China, exemplifies a targeted approach to identifying novel URFs [100].

• Study Workflow and Findings: From 238 newly confirmed HIV-1 positive samples, 37 exhibited subtype inconsistencies across genomic regions, suggesting potential recombination. Subsequent near-full-length genome (NFLG) sequencing and analysis confirmed five novel URFs. These recombinants had mosaic genomes derived from multiple parental CRFs, such as CRF01AE and CRF07BC [100].
• Implications for Surveillance: This study underscores that surveillance based on subgenomic regions (e.g., pol only) can miss critical recombination events. The findings emphasize the importance of NFLG analysis for accurate classification and for understanding the true complexity of HIV transmission networks [100].

Methodological Approaches for Variant Detection

The effectiveness of surveillance is directly tied to the laboratory methodologies employed. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) has become a cornerstone for advanced genomic surveillance of both influenza and HIV.

Experimental Workflow for Genomic Surveillance

The following diagram illustrates a generalized workflow for genomic surveillance of respiratory viruses (like influenza) and blood-borne viruses (like HIV), highlighting shared and pathogen-specific steps.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Tiling PCR for HIV-1 Genome Sequencing (Next-Generation Sequencing)

This protocol, adapted from a 2025 study, enables efficient long-range sequencing of the HIV-1 genome for enhanced recombination detection and drug resistance profiling [105].

• Principle: A set of tiling primers is designed to amplify the 5' half of the HIV-1 genome in six overlapping segments of approximately 1,000 bp. The primers are pooled into just two multiplex PCR reactions (Pool A and B), making the assay high-throughput and cost-effective [105].
• Procedure:
  • RNA Extraction & cDNA Synthesis: Viral RNA is extracted from plasma using a kit such as the QIAamp Viral RNA Mini Kit. RNA is then reverse transcribed to cDNA using a mastermix like SuperScript VILO IV [105].
  • Tiling PCR Amplification: Two separate PCR reactions are set up, each containing cDNA template, a primer pool (A or B), and a high-fidelity PCR mastermix (e.g., SuperFi II Green). The thermocycling conditions typically include an initial denaturation, followed by 35-40 cycles of denaturation, annealing, and extension [105].
  • Library Preparation & Sequencing: The amplified products from both pools are purified, quantified, and normalized. Indexed NGS libraries are prepared (e.g., with the Nextera XT kit) and sequenced on a platform such as the Illumina MiSeq with 2x250 bp paired-end reads [105].
  • Bioinformatic Analysis: Contiguous sequences are assembled from the raw reads using specialized assemblers. For recombination detection, tools like the Recombinant Identification Program (RIP) and jumping profile Hidden Markov Model (jpHMM) are used to identify breakpoints and parental lineages [100] [105].

Near-Full-Length Genome (NFLG) Analysis for HIV Recombinants

This method is considered the gold standard for confirming and characterizing URFs [100].

• Principle: The near-complete HIV genome (~8,000+ bp) is amplified, typically using a two-amplicon strategy, and sequenced. This allows for comprehensive phylogenetic and recombination analysis across all genomic regions [100].
• Procedure:
  • Amplification & Sequencing: NFLGs are amplified from plasma samples with sufficient viral load. The resulting amplicons are sequenced, and the sequences are assembled and subjected to quality control [100].
  • Phylogenetic & Recombination Analysis: Assembled sequences are aligned with reference sequences. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic trees are constructed for different genomic regions (PR-RT, IN, env) to identify discordant clustering that suggests recombination. Recombination breakpoints are precisely mapped using SimPlot software [100].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Reagents and Kits for Genomic Surveillance

Item	Function/Application	Example Product(s)
Viral RNA Extraction Kit	Isolation of high-quality viral RNA from clinical samples (plasma, respiratory specimens).	QIAamp Viral RNA Mini Kit (Qiagen) [100] [102]
Reverse Transcription Kit	Synthesis of complementary DNA (cDNA) from viral RNA template.	SuperScript VILO IV (ThermoFisher) [105]
High-Fidelity PCR Mastermix	Accurate amplification of long genomic targets with minimal errors.	SuperFi II Green Mastermix (ThermoFisher) [105]
NGS Library Prep Kit	Preparation of amplified DNA fragments for sequencing on NGS platforms.	Nextera XT DNA Library Preparation Kit (Illumina) [102]
Bioinformatics Tools	Genome assembly, phylogenetic analysis, and recombination detection.	IRMA [102], RIP [100], jpHMM [100], IQ-TREE [100], SimPlot [100]

The continuous evolution of influenza and HIV necessitates robust and adaptable surveillance systems. As demonstrated, the optimal approach is highly pathogen-specific: influenza surveillance must prioritize tracking antigenic evolution and reassortment, while HIV surveillance requires a focus on detecting and characterizing complex recombinants through near-full-length genome sequencing. The adoption of high-throughput, NGS-based methods like tiling PCR significantly enhances the capacity for early detection of VOCs and CRFs by providing broader genomic coverage and deeper sequencing data. For researchers and public health professionals, investing in these advanced genomic technologies and the bioinformatic capabilities to support them is not merely an upgrade—it is a critical step towards mitigating the ongoing threats posed by these rapidly evolving viruses.

Validating Strategies Through Comparative Outcomes: Case Studies in Vaccine and Drug Development

Correlating Phylogenetic Patterns with Real-World Vaccine Effectiveness (VE)

The battle against rapidly evolving viruses represents one of the most significant challenges in modern medicine and public health. For vaccine development, success hinges not merely on inducing a protective immune response but on anticipating and outpacing viral evolution. Phylogenetic patterns, which map the evolutionary relationships among viral strains, serve as critical predictors of real-world vaccine effectiveness (VE). This guide examines how distinctly different evolutionary pathways between influenza and HIV shape their respective vaccine landscapes, providing a comparative analysis of methodological approaches, experimental data, and practical tools for researchers tackling these complex pathogens.

Influenza viruses, particularly A/H3N2, exhibit a constantly evolving phylogenetic trunk, where one dominant lineage rapidly replaces another. This pattern enables relatively successful annual vaccine updates, though effectiveness varies significantly with antigenic match [80]. In contrast, HIV showcases extreme global diversity with multiple co-circulating lineages, creating formidable barriers for vaccine development [98] [106]. These divergent phylogenetic properties directly correlate with the stark difference in vaccine outcomes: moderate and variable effectiveness for influenza versus no broadly effective vaccine yet developed for HIV.

Comparative Evolutionary Dynamics: Influenza vs. HIV

Key Phylogenetic Properties Driving Vaccine Design

Table 1: Comparative Phylogenetic Properties of Influenza and HIV

Property	Influenza A/H3N2	HIV-1
Evolutionary Rate	~3-5 × 10⁻³ substitutions/site/year [61]	~1-2 × 10⁻³ substitutions/site/year [98]
Phylogenetic Tree Structure	Single trunk with seasonal turnover [80]	Extensive branching with multiple co-circulating lineages [80]
Selective Pressure	Strong antigenic drift driven by herd immunity [61]	Immune escape within hosts and population-level adaptation [98]
Global Diversity Distribution	Temporally structured, seasonal dominance shifts [107] [61]	Geographically structured subtypes (A-K) and recombinant forms [106]
Recombination Rate	Low	High (1-3 events/genome/replication cycle) [98]

Impact of Evolutionary Divergence on Vaccine Antigen Selection

The single-trunk phylogeny of influenza A/H3N2 enables a reactive vaccine strategy where experts predict which single strain will dominate the upcoming season. Success depends on accurately forecasting evolutionary trajectories 6-9 months before peak circulation [61]. The hemagglutinin (HA) protein serves as the primary vaccine target, with antigenic evolution driven predominantly by mutations in epitope regions that allow immune evasion while maintaining receptor binding function.

In contrast, HIV's highly divergent phylogenetic structure with circulating recombinant forms (CRFs) presents what many consider the fundamental barrier to vaccine development. No single immunogen has yet been identified that can elicit protection against this extraordinary diversity. The global distribution of subtypes (e.g., subtype B dominant in North America/Europe, subtypes A and C in Africa) further complicates strain selection, though the translation from genetic to antigenic subtypes remains poorly defined [106].

Methodological Framework: From Sequences to Vaccine Effectiveness Prediction

Experimental Protocols for Phylogenetic-VE Correlation Studies

Protocol 1: Test-Negative Design for VE Estimation

• Application: Used for both influenza [107] [108] [109] and HIV vaccine trials
• Procedure:
  • Identify patients with clinically defined illness (e.g., influenza-like illness)
  • Collect respiratory specimens and test via RT-PCR to classify as cases (positive) or controls (negative)
  • Ascertain vaccination status through registries, medical records, or self-report
  • Consider patients vaccinated if ≥14 days elapsed between vaccination and symptom onset
  • Use multivariable logistic regression to compare odds of vaccination between cases and controls, adjusting for confounders (age, time, region, risk status)
  • Calculate VE as (1 - adjusted odds ratio) × 100% [107] [108]

Protocol 2: Phylogenetic Tree Reconstruction and Feature Extraction

• Application: Candidate vaccine strain identification for influenza [20] [61]
• Procedure:
  • Download HA and NA sequences from databases (GISAID for influenza, Los Alamos for HIV)
  • Align sequences using pipelines (e.g., nextflu "augur" pipeline)
  • Reconstruct phylogenetic trees using maximum likelihood methods (e.g., IQ-TREE2)
  • Convert to timed trees using least squares dating
  • Extract topological features from ancestral subtrees for each strain
  • Define "successful" strains based on near-term descendants in subsequent seasons [20]

Protocol 3: Integrated AI Framework for Antigenic Match Prediction (VaxSeer)

• Application: Prospective influenza vaccine strain selection [61]
• Procedure:
  • Dominance Prediction: Train protein language models on HA sequences with collection dates to forecast future strain prevalence
  • Antigenicity Prediction: Develop neural network models that take vaccine-virus HA sequence pairs as input and predict hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test outcomes
  • Coverage Score Calculation: Compute weighted average of predicted antigenicity across circulating strains based on predicted dominance
  • Vaccine Ranking: Prioritize candidates with highest predicted coverage scores for experimental validation [61]

_{Figure 1: Workflow for phylogenetic pattern correlation with vaccine effectiveness.}

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents and Computational Tools

Component	Function	Specific Examples
Sequence Databases	Source of viral genomic data for phylogenetic analysis	GISAID (influenza), Los Alamos HIV Database, GenBank [20] [98]
Tree Reconstruction Software	Building phylogenetic trees from molecular sequences	IQ-TREE2, least squares dating, BEAST [20]
Antigenicity Assays	Measuring antibody inhibition of viral strains	Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) tests, microneutralization assays [107] [61]
Machine Learning Frameworks	Predicting strain dominance and antigenic match	Protein language models, neural networks for sequence pairs [61]
VE Study Design Templates	Standardized protocols for effectiveness estimation	Test-negative design, case-control studies [107] [108] [109]

Comparative Vaccine Effectiveness Data

Real-World Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness

Table 3: Recent Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Estimates

Season/Region	Vaccine Formulation	Predominant Strain	VE Overall (%)	VE by Age/Specific Strain
2025/26 (England) [107]	Enhanced vaccines (aIIV, IIV-HD, IIVr)	A(H3N2) subclade K	32-39% (adults) 72-75% (<18 years)	72-75% against ED attendance/hospitalization in children
2025 (Southern Hemisphere) [108]	WHO-recommended egg-based inactivated	A(H1N1)pdm09	50.4% (outpatient) 49.7% (hospitalized)	41.6% against A(H1N1)pdm09 hospitalization
2024/25 (Beijing) [109]	Trivalent/quadrivalent inactivated	A(H1N1)pdm09 (98.9%)	48.3% (any influenza)	48.2% against A(H1N1)pdm09; 79.0% in adults 18-59 years

HIV Vaccine Challenges and Limited Success

The RV144 Phase III trial in Thailand represents the only HIV vaccine regimen to demonstrate partial efficacy, showing 31.2% effectiveness against HIV acquisition [106]. This modest success highlights the extraordinary challenges posed by HIV's phylogenetic diversity. Current vaccine development focuses on overcoming these barriers through several innovative approaches:

• Broadly neutralizing antibodies (bNAbs): Targeting conserved epitopes across diverse strains
• Mosaic antigens: Computational design of vaccine immunogens that cover global HIV diversity
• Vector-based platforms: Using viral vectors to induce cytotoxic T-cell responses
• mRNA technology: Leveraging advances demonstrated during COVID-19 pandemic [110]

The correlation between phylogenetic patterns and vaccine effectiveness provides a powerful framework for evaluating and predicting vaccine performance. For influenza, antigenic match between vaccine strains and circulating viruses remains the primary determinant of effectiveness, with mismatches resulting in substantially reduced protection, as observed during the 2025/26 season with emerging A(H3N2) subclade K viruses [107]. The single-trunk phylogeny enables reasonably accurate predictions, though rapid evolution continues to challenge vaccine strain selection.

For HIV, the highly branched phylogeny with extensive global diversity represents the fundamental barrier, compounded by immune evasion mechanisms and the establishment of latent reservoirs [98] [106]. Future directions include the integration of AI and machine learning approaches to better predict evolutionary trajectories, the development of conserved epitope targeting strategies, and the application of gene-editing technologies for functional cures. As phylogenetic analysis methods continue to advance alongside immunogen design platforms, the correlation between viral evolution and vaccine effectiveness will increasingly guide rational vaccine development against these challenging pathogens.

The interaction between influenza and SARS-CoV-2 during the 2024/2025 respiratory season presents a unique opportunity to explore core principles of viral phylodynamics—the study of how epidemiological, immunological, and evolutionary processes shape viral phylogenies [17]. Phylodynamic theory posits that patterns of viral genetic variation are heavily influenced by transmission dynamics and selection, which in turn impart characteristic signatures on the shape of viral family trees [17]. The 2024/2025 season was characterized by an unexpectedly severe influenza epidemic alongside a comparatively subdued SARS-CoV-2 wave, suggesting potential viral interference [104]. This phenomenon, wherein infection with one virus inhibits the replication of another, may be traced to fundamental differences in viral evolution and host immune response, concepts central to phylodynamic analysis. Examining this season through a phylodynamic lens, which contrasts the "star-like" phylogenies of persistent viruses like HIV with the "ladder-like" trees of antigenically drifting viruses like influenza, provides a powerful framework for understanding the observed epidemiological patterns [17] [18].

Epidemiological Profile of the 2024/2025 Influenza Season

The 2024/2025 influenza season in the United States was classified as high severity, the most severe since the 2017–18 season [111]. The season began in mid-November 2024, peaked in early February 2025, and declined to interseasonal levels by May 2025 [111].

Table 1: Preliminary Estimated Disease Burden for the 2024/2025 U.S. Influenza Season [104] [112]

Metric	Estimated Burden (Range)
Illnesses	47 – 82 million
Medical Visits	Not Specified
Hospitalizations	610,000 – 1.3 million
Deaths	27,000 – 130,000

Influenza A viruses were predominant, with A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2) viruses detected at approximately equal levels (53.1% and 46.9% of subtyped influenza A viruses, respectively) [111]. Influenza B activity remained low, with all characterized viruses belonging to the Victoria lineage [111].

Table 2: Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) in the U.S., October 2024–February 2025 [113]

Setting	Age Group	VE Against Any Influenza	VE Against A(H1N1)pdm09	VE Against A(H3N2)
Outpatient	<18 years	32% - 60%	53% - 72%	42%
Outpatient	≥18 years	36% - 54%	Not Reported	Not Reported
Hospitalization	<18 years	63% - 78%	63%	55%
Hospitalization	≥18 years	41% - 55%	Not Reported	Not Reported

The Viral Interference Hypothesis

Epidemiological Observations

The winter of 2024/2025 presented a notable anomaly: a significant influenza epidemic coincided with an unanticipated decline in COVID-19 cases [104]. While SARS-CoV-2 had caused an autumn wave, the typical winter surge was absent. Estimates for the season indicate SARS-CoV-2 was associated with approximately 20.3 million cases, 540,000 hospitalizations, and 63,000 deaths in the U.S., a burden that was substantially overshadowed by influenza [104]. This divergent pattern from expected co-circulation prompted scientists to investigate viral interference as a plausible explanation [104].

Proposed Mechanism: Interferon-Mediated Interference

Viral interference occurs when infection with one virus inhibits the replication or spread of a second virus, often mediated by the host's innate immune response.

Diagram 1: Interferon-mediated viral interference mechanism.

The core mechanism, as demonstrated in in vitro studies using human airway epithelial models, involves a robust interferon (IFN) response triggered by an initial influenza infection [104] [114]. This response creates a broad-spectrum antiviral state in the host cells, which impairs the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to establish a successful infection. The interference has been shown to be dependent on the magnitude and timing of Interferon-Stimulated Gene (ISG) expression [114]. The critical evidence for this mechanism is that treatment with antiviral and immunomodulatory drugs can reverse the interference. Oseltamivir, an antiviral that suppresses influenza replication, can restore SARS-CoV-2 replication [104]. Similarly, innate immune response inhibitors like BX795 and Ruxolitinib, which abrogate IFN signaling, also negate the interference effect [114].

Experimental Protocols for Investigating Viral Interference

In Vitro Sequential Coinfection Model

This protocol is used to delineate the molecular mechanisms of viral interference.

1. Cell Culture Preparation:

• Cell Type: Human airway epithelial cells (e.g., Calu-3, primary human bronchial epithelial cells differentiated at air-liquid interface).
• Culture Conditions: Maintained in appropriate medium to sustain epithelial integrity and function.

2. Primary Infection:

• Virus: Infect cells with influenza virus (e.g., A/H3N2, A/H1N1pdm09, or Influenza B/Victoria lineage) at a low Multiplicity of Infection (MOI, e.g., 0.1-1).
• Time Point: Allow primary infection to proceed for 24-48 hours.

3. Secondary Infection:

• Virus: Inoculate the same cell culture with a SARS-CoV-2 variant (e.g., D614G, Delta, Omicron BA.1, EG.5.1, NB.1.8.1) at a defined MOI.
• Wash Step: Prior to secondary infection, the cell monolayer may be gently washed to remove residual inoculum from the first infection.

4. Experimental Intervention (To Establish Mechanism):

• Antiviral Arm: Treat cells with Oseltamivir carboxylate (the active metabolite) to inhibit influenza replication after primary infection.
• Immunomodulatory Arm: Treat cells with IFN pathway inhibitors (e.g., BX795, a TBK1/IKKε inhibitor; Ruxolitinib, a JAK1/2 inhibitor) post-primary infection to block interferon signaling.

5. Outcome Measurement (24-72 hours post-secondary infection):

• Viral Replication: Quantify SARS-CoV-2 replication via plaque assay, TCID₅₀, or RT-qPCR for viral RNA.
• Host Response: Quantify interferon and ISG expression via RT-qPCR, ELISA, or RNA sequencing.
• Control Groups: Include cells infected with SARS-CoV-2 alone and mock-infected cells.

Diagram 2: Sequential coinfection experimental workflow.

Phylodynamic Analysis of Viral Sequence Data

This methodology uses viral genetic sequences to infer epidemiological dynamics and evolutionary pressures.

1. Data Collection:

• Sequence Data: Obtain genetic sequences (e.g., hemagglutinin for influenza, spike for SARS-CoV-2) from public databases like GISAID (EpiFlu) and GenBank.
• Metadata: Curate associated metadata, including sample collection date, geographic location, and patient age.

2. Phylogenetic Reconstruction:

• Alignment: Perform multiple sequence alignment of viral genomes or genes.
• Tree Building: Reconstruct a time-scaled phylogenetic tree using Bayesian methods (e.g., BEAST, BEAST2) that incorporate molecular clock models to estimate evolutionary rates and time of the most recent common ancestor (tMRCA).

3. Tree Shape Analysis:

• Balance Statistics: Calculate tree balance statistics (e.g., Sackin index) which quantify the symmetry of branching patterns.
• Kernel Method: Employ advanced kernel methods that map complex tree shapes into a feature space to compare overall tree structure, which is more powerful than traditional balance statistics [18].
• Visualization: Use platforms like Nextstrain for real-time visualization of phylogenies and their temporal and spatial dynamics [111].

4. Linking Shape to Process:

• Interpret tree shapes in the context of phylodynamic principles:
  • Star-like trees (long external branches, short internal branches) suggest rapid population expansion, as seen in a growing epidemic or with viruses like HIV that establish chronic infections [17] [18].
  • Ladder-like/Pectinate trees suggest strong directional selection, such as antigenic drift in influenza A/H3N2 hemagglutinin driven by immune escape [17].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 3: Key Reagents for Viral Interference and Phylodynamics Research

Research Reagent	Function & Application
Human Airway Epithelial Cells (Calu-3, Primary)	In vitro model system for studying viral replication, coinfection, and host-pathogen interactions in a relevant tissue context.
Influenza A & B Virus Stocks	Representative strains (e.g., A/H3N2, A/H1N1pdm09, B/Victoria) used as primary infectious agents in coinfection studies.
SARS-CoV-2 Variant Stocks	Representative variants (e.g., D614G, Delta, Omicron sub-lineages) used as secondary challenge viruses in interference experiments.
Oseltamivir Carboxylate	Neuraminidase inhibitor active metabolite; used to suppress influenza replication and test specificity of interference.
BX795	Small-molecule inhibitor of TBK1/IKKε; blocks interferon production pathways to demonstrate IFN-dependence of interference.
Ruxolitinib	JAK1/2 inhibitor; blocks interferon signaling pathways to confirm the role of the IFN response in viral interference.
Nextclade/Nextstrain	Web-based tool for phylogenetic clade assignment, sequence analysis, and real-time visualization of virus evolution [111].
Bayesian Evolutionary Analysis Software (BEAST/BEAST2)	Software package for Bayesian phylogenetic analysis, used to estimate molecular clock rates, population dynamics, and ancestral nodes.

The 2024/2025 influenza season serves as a compelling real-world case study of viral interference, likely mediated by influenza-induced interferon responses that transiently suppressed SARS-CoV-2 transmission. This epidemiological observation aligns with phylodynamic principles, where differences in viral life-history traits—such as the ability of influenza to potently induce interferon versus SARS-CoV-2's more muted initial response—shape not only phylogenetic tree structures but also population-level disease dynamics. The experimental frameworks outlined here provide a pathway for continued investigation into these complex virus-virus interactions. As both viruses continue to co-circulate, a phylodynamic perspective that integrates genomics, population dynamics, and immunology will be crucial for forecasting future epidemics and optimizing public health interventions, such as the timing and composition of seasonal vaccines.

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and influenza virus represent two major pathogens that pose significant challenges to global public health due to their remarkable ability to evolve under immune selection pressure. Despite both being RNA viruses that utilize envelope glycoproteins for host cell entry, they have evolved distinct evolutionary strategies shaped by their different transmission dynamics and replication cycles. HIV establishes persistent lifelong infections characterized by continuous viral evolution within a single host, while influenza virus causes acute, self-limiting infections with evolution primarily occurring at the population level through antigenic drift and shift [15]. This fundamental difference in pathogenesis has profound implications for how these viruses interact with host immune systems and the approaches required for vaccine development. Understanding the comparative evolutionary pressures on these viruses provides critical insights for developing effective countermeasures, including broadly neutralizing antibodies and universal vaccines.

Comparative Evolutionary Dynamics

Table 1: Key Characteristics of Immune Selection in HIV vs. Influenza

Characteristic	HIV-1	Influenza Virus
Infection Type	Chronic, persistent infection	Acute, self-limiting infection
Evolution Timeframe	Continuous within-host evolution over years	Primarily population-level evolution across seasons
Mutation Rate	High mutation rate with extensive recombination	High mutation rate with reassortment capability
Primary Immune Evasion Strategies	Extensive glycosylation; hypervariable loops; conformational masking; conserved site inaccessibility	Antigenic drift; antigenic shift; glycan shielding
Neutralizing Antibody Targets	Envelope glycoprotein spike (gp160); conserved CD4 binding site; V3 loop; gp41 MPER	Hemagglutinin (HA); neuraminidase (NA); HA stem region
Vaccine Development Challenge	Eliciting broadly neutralizing antibodies against conserved regions	Addressing antigenic variability; predicting circulating strains

The evolutionary trajectories of HIV and influenza are shaped by their distinct biological and clinical characteristics. HIV establishes chronic infections that persist for decades within a single host, creating a scenario where the virus undergoes continuous evolution under constant immune pressure [15]. This results in remarkable viral diversity within each infected individual, with HIV using multiple sophisticated immune evasion strategies including extensive glycosylation, hypervariable loops, and conformational masking of conserved receptor-binding sites [15] [115]. The envelope glycoprotein spike of HIV is one of the most heavily glycosylated viral proteins known, with approximately 25 N-linked glycans in about 500 residues, which shields underlying protein epitopes from antibody recognition by presenting host-derived "self" glycans [115].

In contrast, influenza virus causes acute infections typically cleared within days to weeks, with evolutionary pressure primarily occurring through selection of variants that can infect new hosts with no or low pre-existing immunity [15]. Influenza employs antigenic drift (accumulation of point mutations in surface proteins) and antigenic shift (reassortment of gene segments between different strains) as its primary evasion mechanisms [15]. Despite these differences, both viruses face the constraint of maintaining functionally conserved regions necessary for receptor binding and membrane fusion, creating vulnerable targets for broadly neutralizing antibodies.

Experimental Evidence and Research Findings

HIV Integration and Reservoir Establishment

Recent research presented at CROI 2025 has elucidated the mechanisms of HIV-1 integration into the host genome, which is not random but strongly influenced by host chromatin organization and transcriptional activity. Bushman (Abstract 13) conducted studies involving high-throughput integration site sequencing on peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from ART-treated individuals and elite controllers [70]. Genomic DNA was extracted and subjected to ligation-mediated PCR followed by next-generation sequencing (NGS), with integration sites mapped to the human genome (hg38) and compared across individuals using custom bioinformatic pipelines [70].

The research revealed that elite controllers exhibit a highly skewed integration pattern, with marked enrichment in lamina-associated domains (LADs) and repressive chromatin regions defined by H3K9me3 and H3K27me3 histone modifications [70]. In ART-treated individuals, integration showed a broader distribution with substantial overlap in transcriptionally active genes marked by H3K4me3 and open chromatin (ATAC-seq peaks). This suggests that in elite controllers, the immune system preferentially clears cells harboring actively transcribed proviruses, leading to persistence of deeply latent clones – supporting a model of immune editing that shapes the integration landscape [70].

Antibody Cross-Reactivity in HIV-Infected Individuals

A 2014 study by Agrati et al. investigated cellular and humoral cross-immunity against H3N2v influenza strains in presumably unexposed healthy and HIV-infected subjects [116]. The researchers assessed immune responses against H3N2v (A/H3N2/Ind/08/11), animal vaccine H3N2 strain (A/H3N2/Min/11/10), and pandemic H1N1 virus (A/H1N1/Cal/07/09) using hemagglutination inhibition assay for humoral response and ELISpot assay for cell-mediated response [116].

The study found that a large proportion of both healthy and HIV-positive subjects displayed cross-reacting humoral and cellular immune responses against H3N2v strains, suggesting the presence of B- and T-cell clones able to recognize epitopes from emerging viral strains in both groups [116]. However, humoral response was lower in HIV-positive subjects, and a specific age-related pattern of antibody response was observed. Cellular immune response was similar between groups with no relationship to age, and no correlation was found between humoral and cellular immune responses [116].

Vaccine Efficacy in Immunocompromised Populations

A 2023 study by Liu et al. examined the humoral immune response following inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccination (QIV) among HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected adults [117]. This prospective study used enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and hemagglutination-inhibition assay (HAI) to determine IgA, IgG antibody concentration and geometric mean titers (GMT) at day 0 and day 28 post-vaccination [117].

Table 2: Seroconversion Rates After Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccination in HIV+ vs HIV- Individuals

Population	H1N1 Seroconversion	H3N2 Seroconversion	B/Victoria Seroconversion	B/Yamagata Seroconversion
HIV+ (CD4 ≤ 350)	Significantly reduced	Significantly reduced	Significantly reduced	Significantly reduced
HIV+ (CD4 > 350)	Improved response (OR:2.65)	Moderate response	Improved response (OR:3.43)	Moderate response
HIV-uninfected	Strong response	Strong response	Strong response	Strong response

The findings demonstrated that HIV-positive populations with CD4+ T cell counts ≤ 350 cells/mm³ were statistically less immunogenic to all strains of QIV than HIV-uninfected individuals and were less likely to achieve seroconversion to QIV strains (H1N1, BY and BV) [117]. HIV-infected participants with baseline CD4+ T cell counts > 350 cells/mm³ were more likely to generate antibody responses to H1N1 (OR:2.65, 95% CI: 1.07–6.56) and BY (OR: 3.43, 95% CI: 1.37–8.63) compared to those with lower CD4 counts [117].

A 2018 systematic review and network meta-analysis by Zeng et al. compared influenza vaccine strategies for HIV-positive people, analyzing 13 randomized controlled trials [118]. The analysis revealed that adjuvant 7.5 μg booster and 60 μg single vaccine strategies provided better seroconversion and seroprotection outcomes compared to standard 15 μg single vaccine strategies [118]. For example, compared with the 15 μg single vaccine strategy, the odds ratio was highest for the adjuvant 7.5 μg booster strategy (2.99, 95% credible interval 1.18–7.66) for seroconversion for H1N1 at 14–41 days after vaccination [118].

Methodological Approaches

HIV Integration Site Analysis

Table 3: Key Research Reagents for Viral Evolution Studies

Research Reagent	Application	Function in Experimental Protocol
Ligation-mediated PCR	HIV integration site mapping	Amplification of host-virus DNA junctions for sequencing
Next-generation sequencing (NGS)	Genomic analysis of integration sites	High-throughput sequencing of integration sites for genomic mapping
Chromatin Immunoprecipitation (ChIP-seq)	Histone modification analysis	Mapping histone modifications (H3K9me3, H3K27me3) associated with integration sites
ATAC-seq	Chromatin accessibility profiling	Identification of open chromatin regions influencing integration preference
CRISPR-Cas9	Gene editing	Targeted disruption of specific genes to study their role in viral integration
Surface Plasmon Resonance (SPR)	Protein interaction studies	Measurement of binding kinetics between viral and host proteins

The methodological framework for studying HIV integration sites involves multiple sophisticated techniques. High-throughput integration site sequencing begins with extraction of genomic DNA from infected cells, followed by ligation-mediated PCR to amplify host-virus DNA junctions [70]. The resulting libraries are subjected to next-generation sequencing, and bioinformatic pipelines map integration sites to the reference genome (hg38) [70]. Complementary methods include chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-seq) to map histone modifications and ATAC-seq to identify open chromatin regions, providing comprehensive understanding of the chromatin context favoring integration [70].

Functional validation often employs reporter assays with luciferase constructs with engineered integration sites to quantify transcriptional activity depending on genomic context [70]. Additional confirmation comes from single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) to quantify expression variability of proviruses in different chromatin environments [70].

Nuclear Import Studies for HIV Capsid

Jacques (Abstract 29) characterized the interaction between HIV-1 capsid (CA) and FG-nucleoporins using multiple orthogonal approaches [70]. The methodology included generating CA tubes in vitro and performing binding assays with purified FG-repeat peptides and recombinant nucleoporins. Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) and isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) provided quantitative data on affinity and binding kinetics [70]. Mutagenesis studies introduced point mutations (N74D, A105T) into CA to disrupt the hydrophobic FG-binding pocket, with impact assessed in synchronized cell cycle-arrested HeLa cells using subcellular fractionation and quantification of 2-long terminal repeat (LTR) circles [70]. Cryo-electron tomography (cryo-ET) visualized CA-nuclear pore complex engagement in situ, and the capsid inhibitor lenacapavir was tested for its ability to inhibit binding in vitro and nuclear import in cell culture [70].

Discussion and Research Implications

The comparative analysis of evolutionary pressures on HIV and influenza reveals both divergent strategies and convergent themes in immune evasion. HIV's establishment of persistent infection necessitates continuous within-host evolution, resulting in extraordinary diversity and sophisticated shielding of conserved envelope regions [15] [115]. The virus maintains functional conservation in receptor-binding and fusion domains while minimizing their exposure to immune recognition through conformational dynamics. This strategy presents particular challenges for vaccine development, as the most vulnerable viral targets are transiently exposed or structurally obscured.

Influenza's evolutionary strategy leverages antigenic variation across a population, with acute infection allowing for rapid selection of variants capable of evading pre-existing immunity [15]. The recent identification of broadly neutralizing antibodies targeting the conserved hemagglutinin stem region demonstrates that influenza, like HIV, maintains functional constraints that create vulnerabilities [15] [115]. The parallel challenges in eliciting broadly neutralizing antibodies against both pathogens suggest potential for shared vaccine strategies focused on targeting these conserved functional regions.

For both viruses, glycan shielding represents a convergent evolutionary solution to limit antibody access to protein surfaces, though the specific implementation differs [15] [115]. HIV employs exceptionally high glycan density on its envelope spike, while influenza uses strategic glycan placement around receptor-binding sites. Understanding these similarities and differences informs immunogen design for next-generation vaccines aiming to elicit broadly protective responses.

The findings from vaccine studies in HIV-positive individuals highlight the importance of CD4+ T cell help in generating robust antibody responses against influenza [117]. The impaired responses in individuals with CD4 counts ≤350 cells/mm³ underscore the interconnectedness of humoral and cellular immunity, with implications for vaccine strategies in immunocompromised populations. The superior performance of adjuvanted and high-dose vaccines in this population suggests pathways to improved protection [118].

Recent advances in understanding HIV integration site preferences and nuclear import mechanisms open new avenues for therapeutic intervention [70]. The demonstration that HIV capsid functions as a viral karyopherin through direct interaction with nucleoporins reveals a target for capsid inhibitors like lenacapavir [70]. Similarly, the role of liquid-liquid phase separation in organizing integration machinery suggests novel mechanisms to manipulate viral persistence [70].

The comparative analysis of evolutionary pressures on HIV and influenza reveals that despite different pathogenesis strategies, both viruses face similar fundamental constraints of maintaining functionally conserved regions while evading host immunity. This convergence creates opportunities for shared approaches to vaccine design, particularly in targeting conserved epitopes through structure-based immunogen design. The differential vaccine responses in HIV-infected individuals highlight the critical role of CD4+ T cell help in generating protective immunity and support the use of adjuvanted or high-dose formulations in immunocompromised populations. Future research should leverage increasing structural and mechanistic insights into viral replication and immune evasion to develop interventions that target essential viral functions while anticipating evolutionary escape pathways.

Evaluating the Success of Long-Acting Antiretrovirals Against Evolving HIV Strains

The development of long-acting antiretroviral therapy (LA-ART) represents a paradigm shift in HIV management, offering a promising alternative to daily oral regimens. However, the success of these novel formulations must be evaluated against the backdrop of HIV's extraordinary evolutionary capacity. HIV-1 exhibits genetic diversity driven by its high substitution rate (approximately 0.002 substitutions/site/year), error-prone reverse transcriptase lacking proofreading capabilities, and frequent recombination events [98]. This evolutionary potential facilitates the emergence of drug-resistant variants, particularly under suboptimal drug pressure, creating a critical challenge for long-acting formulations that maintain sustained drug levels over extended periods [119] [120].

The comparative evolution of HIV and influenza phylogenies reveals distinct evolutionary patterns; while influenza evolves primarily through antigenic drift and shift, HIV diversification occurs through complex quasi-species dynamics within single hosts and populations. Understanding these evolutionary mechanisms is essential for designing LA-ART regimens that can suppress viral replication across diverse subtypes and pre-existing resistant variants [98]. This analysis evaluates the efficacy of current LA-ART options against evolving HIV strains through examination of clinical trial data, real-world evidence, and emerging resistance profiles.

Current Landscape of Long-Acting Antiretroviral Therapies

Approved Long-Acting Regimens

The pipeline of LA-ART has expanded beyond the first-approved injectable regimen, with several modalities now in clinical use or advanced development. The current landscape includes:

• Cabotegravir + Rilpivirine (CAB+RPV): The first complete long-acting regimen, administered as intramuscular injections monthly or every two months [121].
• Lenacapavir (LEN): A novel capsid inhibitor with twice-yearly subcutaneous administration potential, currently approved for multi-drug resistant HIV in combination with other antiretrovirals [122].
• Investigational Combinations: Gilead's twice-yearly regimen of lenacapavir with broadly neutralizing antibodies (bNAbs teropavimab and zinlirvimab) recently received Breakthrough Therapy Designation [122].

Emerging Modalities in Development

Several promising LA-ART modalities are advancing through clinical development, aiming to address limitations of current options:

• Islatravir and Ulonivirine: A once-weekly oral combination showing promise in clinical trials [121].
• Lenacapavir and Islatravir: Another once-weekly oral ART combination under investigation [121].
• MK-8591A (Doravirine + Islatravir): A daily oral ART regimen currently under regulatory review [121].

Table 1: Comparison of Key Long-Acting Antiretroviral Modalities

Modality	Dosing Frequency	Administration Route	Development Stage	Key Advantages
CAB+RPV LA	Monthly/2-monthly	Intramuscular injection	Approved (2021)	First complete LA-ART regimen
Lenacapavir	Every 6 months	Subcutaneous injection	Approved for MDR HIV	Novel mechanism; long duration
LEN+TAB+ZAB	Every 6 months	Injection + IV infusion	Phase 2	Combination with bNAbs
Islatravir+Ulonivirine	Weekly	Oral	Phase 3	Non-injectable option
LA Oral Tablets	Weekly to monthly	Oral	Early development	Familiar administration

Methodologies for Evaluating LA-ART Efficacy

Clinical Trial Designs

Robust evaluation of LA-ART against evolving HIV strains employs several methodological approaches. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials for CAB+RPV established the foundation, enrolling virologically suppressed adults switched from daily oral ART to the injectable regimen with follow-up periods of 48-96 weeks [121]. These studies primarily measured the proportion of participants maintaining viral suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL) using the FDA snapshot algorithm.

More recent pragmatic trial designs have expanded inclusion criteria to mirror real-world populations. The VOLITION study (Phase 3b) assessed treatment-naive adults offered the option to switch to CAB+RPV after achieving rapid viral suppression with dolutegravir/lamivudine (DTG/3TC) [123]. This design evaluates the feasibility of early transition to LA-ART in diverse populations.

Real-World Effectiveness Studies

Observational cohorts provide critical complementary evidence about LA-ART performance in clinical practice. Key studies include:

• OPERA Cohort: Includes data from over 150,000 people with HIV in the U.S., with analysis of 3,304 recipients of at least one CAB+RPV injection (January 2021-December 2023) [121].
• CARLOS Cohort: A German real-world study reporting 24-month outcomes including effectiveness, adherence to injections, and participant-reported outcomes [123].
• BEYOND Study: An observational real-world U.S. study tracking perspectives of people with HIV following switch to CAB+RPV LA [123].

These studies employ time-to-event analyses for virologic failure, mixed-effects models for adherence measures, and qualitative methods for patient-reported outcomes.

Resistance Monitoring Protocols

Comprehensive resistance monitoring forms the cornerstone of evaluating LA-ART against evolving strains. Standardized protocols include:

• Genotypic Resistance Testing: Standard population sequencing of HIV pol gene at baseline and failure, with emphasis on integrase and reverse transcriptase regions for CAB+RPV.
• Phenotypic Assays: Assessment of drug susceptibility fold-change for specific mutations using recombinant virus assays.
• Pre-treatment Screening: Baseline resistance testing for reverse transcriptase and integrase resistance-associated mutations, particularly critical for rilpivirine due to its low genetic barrier to resistance [121].

Efficacy Data and Comparative Performance

Virologic Outcomes in Clinical Trials and Real-World Settings

Long-acting antiretrovirals have demonstrated generally high efficacy in both controlled trials and real-world implementation, including in challenging populations.

Table 2: Virologic Outcomes of CAB+RPV in Key Studies

Study	Population	Sample Size	Follow-up	Virologic Suppression	Virologic Failure
OPERA Cohort [121]	Viremic at initiation	368	12 months median	88% (HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL)	3 confirmed failures
Spinelli et al. [121]	With/without viral suppression	370	48 weeks	97% (viremic); 99% (suppressed)	Not specified
CARLOS (24-month) [123]	Real-world setting	Not specified	24 months	High rates maintained	Low incidence
COMBINE-2 [123]	Treatment-experienced, suppressed	Not specified	Not specified	High virologic suppression	Few virologic failures

Notably, recent evidence supports the use of CAB+RPV in individuals with viremia at initiation, a population excluded from initial approval criteria. The International Antiviral Society (IAS)-USA updated treatment guidelines in March 2024 to endorse this approach for selected individuals with adherence challenges, provided virus is susceptible to both drugs [121].

Special Population Efficacy

Heavily Treatment-Experienced Patients

Lenacapavir has demonstrated particular promise for multi-drug resistant (MDR) HIV, with studies showing efficacy in achieving viral suppression where other regimens have failed. Its multi-stage mechanism of action—targeting multiple steps of the viral lifecycle—and lack of cross-resistance to existing drug classes make it particularly valuable for MDR populations [122].

Patients with Adherence Challenges

Real-world studies demonstrate the significant impact of LA-ART on populations with historical adherence barriers. In the OPERA cohort, participants initiating CAB+RPV with viremia achieved 88% viral suppression despite high rates of housing instability (40%) and substance use (46%) [121]. This represents a crucial advance for reaching underserved populations.

Resistance Mechanisms and Evolutionary Responses

Documented Resistance Mutations

The success of LA-ART must be evaluated against HIV's capacity to develop resistance under selective drug pressure. Documented resistance patterns include:

• Rilpivirine-associated mutations: K103N, Y181C, E138K in reverse transcriptase, often present as pre-existing variants in some populations [121].
• Integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) mutations: While cabotegravir has a higher resistance barrier than rilpivirine, INSTI-associated mutations (e.g., Q148K/R/H) can emerge following virologic failure [120].
• Subtype-specific variations: Non-subtype B viruses may demonstrate different resistance mutation patterns, with subtype C more likely to develop Y181C versus K103N for subtype B in response to NNRTIs [120].

Evolutionary Dynamics Under LA-ART Pressure

The extended dosing intervals of LA-ART create unique evolutionary pressures distinct from daily oral regimens. Key dynamics include:

• Tail-phase pharmacokinetics: The prolonged subtherapeutic drug levels during the tail phase of LA-ART create a selective window for resistant variants if adherence is inconsistent [121].
• Compartment-specific evolution: The distribution characteristics of long-acting formulations may create tissue-specific selective pressures, potentially favoring variants with enhanced penetration capabilities [98].
• Pre-existing minority variants: The high genetic diversity of HIV-1 means resistant variants often pre-exist as minority quasi-species before treatment initiation, necessitating enhanced sensitivity resistance testing [119].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Methods

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Methods for LA-ART Evaluation

Reagent/Method	Application	Key Function in LA-ART Research
Recombinant Virus Assays	Phenotypic resistance testing	Quantifies fold-change in drug susceptibility for specific mutations
Population Sequencing	Genotypic resistance testing	Identifies majority variants in pol gene at baseline and failure
Next-generation Sequencing	Minority variant detection	Identifies low-frequency resistant quasi-species (<20% frequency)
LC-MS/MS	Drug concentration monitoring	Quantifies drug levels in plasma and tissue compartments
PBMC Co-culture	Viral reservoir assessment	Measures latent reservoir size and composition
TLR7 Agonists	HIV cure research	Investigational agents for latency reversal (e.g., vesatolimod)
bNAbs	Therapeutic and cure research	Broadly neutralizing antibodies for passive immunization

Long-acting antiretrovirals represent a significant advancement in HIV therapy, demonstrating robust efficacy across diverse populations, including those with historical adherence challenges. The documented success of CAB+RPV in real-world settings and the promising pipeline of agents like lenacapavir-based regimens underscore the potential of LA-ART to transform HIV management.

However, the evolutionary dynamics of HIV necessitate ongoing vigilance. Critical research priorities include:

• Enhanced resistance prediction through improved understanding of subtype-specific resistance pathways and minority variant impacts
• Novel therapeutic combinations that raise the genetic barrier to resistance, such as lenacapavir with bNAbs
• Implementation strategies that address the unique challenges of long-acting delivery systems, particularly for marginalized populations
• Continued monitoring of resistance patterns as LA-ART utilization expands globally

The comparative evolution of HIV and influenza phylogenies reveals distinct challenges; while influenza vaccines must address antigenic shift, HIV therapeutics must contend with incredible intra-host diversity and rapid evolution under selective pressure. LA-ART regimens with higher resistance barriers and multi-mechanism approaches offer promising paths forward in this ongoing evolutionary arms race.

Assessing the Clinical Impact of Subtype-Specific Variations on Disease Progression and Therapy

The remarkable genetic diversity of viruses such as HIV-1 and Influenza presents a formidable challenge in clinical management and drug development. For HIV-1, group M alone has diversified into numerous subtypes (A–D, F–H, J, K), sub-subtypes, and over 48 circulating recombinant forms (CRFs) [124]. Similarly, influenza viruses exhibit significant type and subtype diversity, as seen in the neuraminidase (NA) proteins N1, N2, and type B [125]. This review provides a comparative guide to the clinical impact of these variations, framing the discussion within the broader thesis of viral evolution. It objectively compares how subtype differences influence disease progression and therapy response, supported by experimental data and structured protocols, to inform researchers and drug development professionals.

HIV-1 Subtype Diversity: A Direct Link to Clinical Outcomes

Subtype variations in HIV-1 have demonstrated significant and measurable impacts on disease progression and the effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy (ART).

Impact on Disease Progression and Immunological Response

Evidence from a diverse cohort in south London demonstrated that patients infected with subtype D experienced a statistically significant four-fold faster rate of CD4 decline prior to ART initiation compared to other subtypes [126]. Furthermore, subtype D was associated with a higher rate of virological rebound (70% at six months) compared to subtypes B (45%), A (35%), and C (34%) [126]. A large-scale cohort study in Guangxi, China, further confirmed that subtype diversity affects long-term clinical outcomes during ART. Compared to the CRF07BC subtype, patients with CRF01AE and CRF08_BC showed poorer immunologic and virologic responses, including a longer time to achieve immune recovery and a shorter time to immunologic failure [127].

Table 1: Impact of HIV-1 Subtypes on Clinical Progression and Therapy Response

Subtype	Impact on Disease Progression	Impact on Therapy	Key Supporting Evidence
Subtype D	Faster CD4+ T-cell decline [126].	Higher rate of virologic failure and rebound [126].	London cohort (n=679); adjusted analysis [126].
CRF01_AE	Poorer immunologic recovery during ART [127].	Negative factor for long-term mortality [127].	Guangxi, China cohort (n=5950); Cox model analysis [127].
CRF08_BC	Poorer immunologic and virologic response [127].	Negative factor for virologic suppression; higher DRM prevalence [127].	Guangxi, China cohort (n=5950); Cox model analysis [127].
Subtype C	Associated with aggressive disease [127].	Higher risk of K65R mutation emergence on tenofovir [124].	Global clinical evidence; in vitro template analysis [124].

Impact on Drug Resistance Mutations

Subtype-specific polymorphisms can significantly influence the development of drug resistance. A prominent example is the K65R mutation, which confers resistance to key nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). This mutation emerges more frequently and rapidly in subtype C viruses than in subtype B due to a template-specific mechanism involving a homopolymeric stretch of adenine bases in the viral genome, which facilitates the mutation during reverse transcription [124]. Differences have also been documented for non-NRTIs and protease inhibitors. For instance, the polymorphism M36I in the protease gene (common in non-B subtypes) affects both the patterns of resistance that emerge under drug pressure and viral replication capacity [124].

Table 2: HIV-1 Subtype-Associated Drug Resistance Mutations

Drug Class	Mutation	Subtype/CRF Association	Clinical/Laboratory Impact
NRTI	K65R	Emerges more frequently in Subtype C [124].	Broad high-level NRTI resistance; related to template nucleotide sequence [124].
Protease Inhibitor	M36I	Subtype C (I36) vs. Subtype B (M36) [124].	Alters susceptibility to PIs and viral replication capacity [124].
Integrase Inhibitor	R263K	Most common pathway for Dolutegravir failure in Subtype B [124].	Pathway differs by subtype during Dolutegravir therapy [124].
Integrase Inhibitor	G118R	Most common pathway for Dolutegravir failure in Subtype C [124].	Pathway differs by subtype during Dolutegravir therapy [124].

Influenza: Subtyping and Vaccine Immunology

In influenza, subtyping is critical for surveillance and vaccine design, with a focus on the two major surface glycoproteins, hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA).

Molecular Subtyping for Vaccine Response Prediction

A study on the seasonal influenza vaccine analyzed pre-vaccination multi-omic data (transcriptomics, proteomics, glycomics, metabolomics) from 62 recipients. The integration of this data revealed five distinct baseline molecular subtypes (BMS) with unique immune signatures. These pre-existing differences in innate or adaptive immunity were linked to significant variations in baseline Immunoglobulin A (IgA) and Hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) titers, and these differences persisted 28 days post-vaccination [128]. This underscores the role of an individual's baseline immune state in shaping vaccine response.

Quantifying Subtype-Specific Antigens for Vaccine Potency

The NA content in trivalent influenza vaccines (TIV) has been historically difficult to quantify. To address this, researchers have developed universal, subtype-specific antibodies for the quantitative analysis of N1, N2, and type B NA. These antibodies were generated against highly conserved, subtype-specific peptide epitopes identified through comprehensive bioinformatics analysis [125]. The assay allows for the specific quantification of NA in trivalent vaccine formulations, revealing significant differences in the NA:HA ratio among products from different manufacturers, which could impact the quality and efficacy of vaccines [125].

Experimental Protocols for Subtype Analysis

To ensure reproducibility and facilitate further research, this section outlines key experimental methodologies cited in the comparative analysis.

Protocol 1: Near-Full-Length HIV-1 Proviral Sequencing (FLIP-seq)

Objective: To characterize the intact and defective proviral landscape in individuals with non-B HIV-1 subtypes [129].

• Cell Sampling: Genomic DNA is extracted from resting CD4+ T-cells (rCD4). A median of 120,000 cells per donor is sampled to ensure sufficient coverage [129].
• Near-Full-Length PCR (NFL): HIV-1 proviruses are amplified from the genomic DNA using single-genome amplification (SGA) to prevent in vitro recombination and ensure that each sequenced genome comes from a single template [129].
• Sequencing and Bioinformatics: The amplified NFL products are sequenced using next-generation sequencing (NGS). The sequences are then subjected to:
  • Subtyping: Using phylogenetic analysis to assign subtypes and identify recombinants.
  • Intactness Assessment: Using tools like HIVSeqinR to scan for defects such as large deletions, APOBEC-associated hypermutations, premature stop codons, and packaging signal defects. A provirus is classified as intact only if it lacks all these defects [129].
  • Clonal Expansion Analysis: Sequences sharing 100% identity are identified as members of an expanded clone, providing insights into reservoir dynamics [129].

Protocol 2: Multi-Omic Integration for Baseline Molecular Subtyping

Objective: To identify baseline molecular subtypes associated with heterogeneous vaccination responses by integrating multiple 'omics' data types [128].

• Data Collection: Pre-vaccination biospecimens are used to generate:
  • Transcriptomics: RNA sequencing (RNAseq) data from whole blood.
  • Proteomics & Glycomics: Data from serum samples.
  • Metabolomics: Data from urine samples.
• Data Pre-processing: Each data modality is independently adjusted for technical and biological covariates (e.g., age, sex, BMI, batch effects) using linear models. Data is then Z-score transformed [128].
• Network Fusion and Clustering: The pre-processed data is integrated using Similarity Network Fusion (SNF):
  • Patient similarity networks are computed for each data type individually.
  • These networks are fused into a single, combined network that represents the full spectrum of the underlying data.
  • Clustering is performed on the fused network to identify distinct baseline molecular subtypes (BMS) [128].

Protocol 3: Quantification of Neuraminidase in Vaccines

Objective: To quantitatively determine the subtype-specific neuraminidase (NA) antigen content in trivalent influenza vaccines (TIV) [125].

• Epitope Selection and Antibody Production: Highly conserved, subtype-specific peptide epitopes within N1, N2, and type B NA groups are identified via bioinformatic analysis. Rabbits are immunized with these peptides to generate mono-specific antibodies [125].
• Specificity Validation: The antibodies are validated for specificity using:
  • Western Blot (WB): Against a panel of different influenza virus subtypes and allantoic fluid to confirm no cross-reactivity.
  • Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA): Using vaccine reference antigens to confirm type/subtype-specific binding [125].
• Quantitative Slot Blot Assay:
  • Vaccine samples are blotted onto a membrane.
  • Subtype-specific antibodies are applied to react with their respective NA antigens.
  • The signal is detected and quantified, allowing for the calculation of NA concentration in the vaccine preparation. This method can be used for both monovalent and trivalent vaccines without significant interference [125].

Conceptual Workflows and Evolutionary Dynamics

Workflow for HIV-1 Proviral Reservoir Analysis

The following diagram illustrates the experimental and computational workflow for analyzing the HIV-1 proviral landscape, a key protocol for understanding reservoir persistence across subtypes.

The Fitness Valley in Viral Evolution

A key evolutionary concept explaining the emergence of fitter viral variants, such as SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern (VOCs) or drug-resistant HIV, is the "fitness valley." This model illustrates how a primary mutation, while beneficial in one respect (e.g., immune escape), often carries a fitness cost that must be compensated for by subsequent mutations.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

This table details key reagents and tools essential for conducting research on viral subtypes, as featured in the cited studies.

Table 3: Essential Reagents and Tools for Viral Subtype Research

Tool/Reagent	Function	Application Example
Rega HIV Subtyping Tool	Automated subtyping tool using phylogenetic analysis to identify HIV-1 subtypes and recombinants [124].	Accurately identifies pure subtypes and major CRFs in pol sequences [124].
Subtype-Specific Anti-NA Antibodies	Mono-specific antibodies for quantitative immunoassay of N1, N2, and type B neuraminidase [125].	Quantifying NA antigen content in trivalent influenza vaccines from different manufacturers [125].
Stanford HIV Drug Resistance Database	Curated database for interpreting HIV-1 genotypic resistance to antiretroviral drugs [124] [130].	Identifying and surveillance of drug resistance mutations (DRMs) in different subtypes [130] [127].
Modified Intact Proviral DNA Assay (IPDA)	A droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) assay for quantifying intact HIV-1 proviruses [129].	Adapted for non-B subtypes (A1, D, recombinants) to study reservoir size and composition [129].
Similarity Network Fusion (SNF)	Computational method for integrating multiple data types by fusing patient similarity networks [128].	Identifying baseline molecular subtypes from integrated transcriptomic, proteomic, glycomic, and metabolomic data [128].

The evidence demonstrates that subtype-specific variations are not mere phylogenetic distinctions but have direct, measurable consequences for clinical outcomes. In HIV-1, subtypes impact disease progression, drug resistance pathways, and therapy success. In influenza, subtyping is fundamental to understanding vaccine immunology and optimizing vaccine quality. The experimental protocols and tools detailed herein provide a framework for ongoing research. Future work must expand beyond the historically studied subtype B of HIV-1 and ensure that diagnostic assays, treatment guidelines, and vaccine strategies are optimized for the globally diverse viral landscape. A deep appreciation of subtype diversity is therefore indispensable for effective disease control and drug development.

Conclusion

The comparative phylodynamic analysis of Influenza and HIV reveals that their distinct evolutionary strategies—shaped by genomic architecture, mutation rates, and selection pressures—demand tailored approaches in biomedical research and clinical management. While Influenza's rapid, ladder-like evolution necessitates agile, predictive surveillance and regularly updated vaccines, HIV's vast, star-like diversity and recombination potential challenge long-term drug efficacy and diagnostic accuracy. The integration of phylodynamic methods and AI presents a powerful frontier for anticipating viral evolution. Future directions must focus on developing broad-spectrum vaccines, universal therapeutic regimens, and enhanced global genomic surveillance networks that account for these evolutionary dynamics. Embracing these evolution-informed strategies is paramount for achieving the ultimate goal of ending the threats posed by these enduring pandemics.

References

• 1. The Structure of the Influenza A Virus Genome - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7191640/]
• 2. Trans-Acting RNA–RNA Interactions in Segmented RNA ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/11/8/751]
• 3. Sites of Retroviral DNA Integration: From Basic Research to ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4866806/]
• 4. Understanding Retroviral Life Cycle and its Genomic RNA ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022283622005514]
• 5. Reassortment in segmented RNA viruses - PubMed Central [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5119462/]
• 6. Why do RNA viruses recombine? [https://www.nature.com/articles/nrmicro2614]
• 7. Retroviral PBS-segment sequence and structure - Retrovirology [https://retrovirology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12977-024-00646-x]
• 8. Comparison of SIV and HIV-1 Genomic RNA Structures ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3616985/]
• 9. In vivo secondary structural analysis of Influenza A virus ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00018-023-04764-1]
• 10. The Role of Genomics in Tracking the Evolution ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2739293/]
• 11. Molecular basis of genetic variation of viruses - PubMed Central [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7153327/]
• 12. The origin of genetic diversity in HIV-1 [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0168170212002122]
• 13. Recombination in viruses: Mechanisms, methods of study, and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7106159/]
• 14. The genomic and epidemiological dynamics of human ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/nature06945]
• 15. The challenges of eliciting neutralizing antibodies to HIV-1 ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/nrmicro1819]
• 16. Evolutionary analysis of the dynamics of viral infectious disease [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7097015/]
• 17. Viral Phylodynamics - PMC - PubMed Central - NIH [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3605911/]
• 18. Mapping the Shapes of Phylogenetic Trees from Human and ... [https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0078122]
• 19. Viruses and Evolution | History of Vaccines [https://historyofvaccines.org/vaccines-101/what-do-vaccines-do/viruses-and-evolution/]
• 20. Phylogenetic identification of influenza virus candidates for ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10624341/]
• 21. Proposal for a Global Classification and Nomenclature ... [https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/30/8/23-1176_article]
• 22. Using phylogenetics to infer HIV-1 transmission direction ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9499565/]
• 23. analysis of the dynamics of... | Nature Reviews Evolutionary Genetics [https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg2583?error=cookies_not_supported&code=af31dd64-2672-4896-99bd-786db692bf49]
• 24. Quasispecies Theory and the Behavior of RNA Viruses [https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1001005]
• 25. Quasispecies theory and emerging viruses: challenges ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s44298-024-00066-w]
• 26. Detailed analysis of the genetic evolution of influenza virus ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2870435/]
• 27. The Origins and Genetic Diversity of HIV-1: Evolutionary ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/26/22/10909]
• 28. Transmission restriction and genomic evolution co-shape ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1995820X24000257]
• 29. subtype HIV worldwide diversity [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30882484/]
• 30. Predictive evolutionary modelling for influenza virus by site ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-46918-0]
• 31. Modeling HIV quasispecies evolutionary dynamics - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1963478/]
• 32. Long-term experimental evolution of HIV-1 reveals effects of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7793244/]
• 33. Cross-Species Virus Transmission and the Emergence of New ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2546865/]
• 34. The Ecology and Evolution of Influenza Viruses - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7328453/]
• 35. Recent advances in understanding HIV evolution - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5414815/]
• 36. One Health in a globalized world: challenges and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12406317/]
• 37. Phylodynamic Analysis - an overview [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/phylodynamic-analysis]
• 38. Phylogenetics in HIV transmission: taking within-host ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6449181/]
• 39. Evolution of Influenza Viruses—Drug Resistance, Treatment ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9602850/]
• 40. How HIV's shape-shifting protein reveals clues for smarter ... [https://www.eatg.org/hiv-news/how-hivs-shape-shifting-protein-reveals-clues-for-smarter-drug-design/]
• 41. Influenza as a Case Study | PLOS Computational Biology [https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002835]
• 42. Influenza Virus Genome Sequencing and Genetic ... [https://www.cdc.gov/flu/php/viruses/genetic-characterization.html]
• 43. Phylogenetic and phylodynamic approaches to ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41576-022-00483-8]
• 44. Comparative phylodynamics reveals the evolutionary history ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9129158/]
• 45. Viral phylodynamics - Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_phylodynamics]
• 46. Linking influenza virus evolution within and between ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7025719/]
• 47. MASCOT-Skyline integrates population and migration dynamics to... [https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1013421]
• 48. The Role of Genomic Data in Tracking Infectious Diseases [https://scisimple.com/en/articles/2025-11-13-the-role-of-genomic-data-in-tracking-infectious-diseases--a9n5r7n]
• 49. Mathematical Models for HIV Transmission Dynamics [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3387534/]
• 50. Parallel evolution in the emergence of highly pathogenic ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19364-x]
• 51. From conceptualising to modelling structural determinants and ... [https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-024-03580-z]
• 52. Molecular clock of viral evolution, and the neutral theory [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2263602/]
• 53. Molecular epidemiology and phylogenetic analysis of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11295596/]
• 54. The molecular clock of HIV-1 unveiled through analysis ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC17955/]
• 55. Molecular clock of HIV-1 envelope genes under early immune ... [https://retrovirology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12977-016-0269-6]
• 56. Performance of Relaxed-Clock Methods in Estimating ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2877995/]
• 57. Assessing the relative performance of fast molecular dating ... [https://bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12864-022-09030-5]
• 58. Validation of molecular clock inferred HIV infection ages [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1567134821000964]
• 59. Archival influenza virus genomes from Europe reveal ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-29614-9]
• 60. A new pace for molecular clocks [https://www.geomar.de/en/news/article/a-new-pace-for-molecular-clocks]
• 61. Influenza vaccine strain selection with an AI-based ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-025-03917-y]
• 62. AI model predicts flu vaccine strains more accurately than ... [https://www.news-medical.net/news/20250902/AI-model-predicts-flu-vaccine-strains-more-accurately-than-WHO.aspx]
• 63. Predicting vaccine effectiveness [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41551-025-01539-w]
• 64. MIT researchers develop AI tool to improve flu vaccine ... [https://news.mit.edu/2025/vaxseer-ai-tool-to-improve-flu-vaccine-strain-selection-0828]
• 65. With an absent CDC and mismatched 'subclade K' flu strain ... [https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/influenza-vaccines/absent-cdc-and-mismatched-subclade-k-flu-strain-experts-face-upcoming-season]
• 66. Leveraging viral genome sequences and machine learning ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s42004-025-01583-2]
• 67. Near real-time data on the human neutralizing antibody ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12640540/]
• 68. Timely vaccine strain selection and genomic surveillance ... [https://elifesciences.org/reviewed-preprints/104282v2]
• 69. Clonal heterogeneity and antigenic stimulation shape ... [https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1013433]
• 70. CROI 2025: Summary of Basic Science Research in HIV - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12324712/]
• 71. Context-Aware Phylogenetic Trees for Phylogeny-Based ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/genetics/articles/10.3389/fgene.2022.891240/full]
• 72. Iroki: automatic customization and visualization of ... [https://peerj.com/articles/8584/]
• 73. Visualizing phylogenetic trees using FigTree [http://beast.community/workshop_figtree]
• 74. Reproducible and later vaccine strain selection can ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12638742/]
• 75. Phylogenetics and molecular evolution to understand and ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40588586/]
• 76. 2025-2026 Flu Season: Reduced Vaccine Match May Lead ... [https://www.patientcareonline.com/view/2025-2026-flu-season-reduced-vaccine-match-may-lead-to-increased-transmission-and-severity-experts-warn]
• 77. Phylogeography and Evolution of H4N9 Influenza Viruses - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12114901/]
• 78. Different antigenic distance metrics generate similar ... [https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1013720]
• 79. Hypothesis testing using Phylogenetics (HyPhy) and ... [https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.09.28.25336847v1]
• 80. Phylogenetic Properties of RNA Viruses [https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figures?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0044849]
• 81. HIV-1 Drug Resistance Trends in the Era of Modern ... - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12343105/]
• 82. Fact Sheet: HIV Drug Resistance [https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/hiv-drug-resistance]
• 83. What leads to treatment failure among people living with HIV [https://virologyj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12985-025-02916-2]
• 84. Monitoring HIV Drug Resistance Fact Sheet [https://www.cdc.gov/global-hiv-tb/php/resources/hiv-drug-resistance-cadre-fact-sheet.html]
• 85. Current Perspectives on HIV-1 Antiretroviral Drug Resistance [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4213579/]
• 86. Gilead Presents New HIV Research Data at EACS 2025 [https://www.gilead.com/news/news-details/2025/gilead-presents-new-hiv-research-data-at-eacs-2025--driving-scientific-innovation-in-treatment-and-prevention]
• 87. Merck to Present New Data from HIV Treatment and ... [https://www.merck.com/news/merck-to-present-new-data-from-hiv-treatment-and-prevention-pipeline-at-european-aids-conference-2025/]
• 88. The Origins and Genetic Diversity of HIV-1 - PubMed Central [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12653013/]
• 89. Threat, challenges, and preparedness for future pandemics [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1567134822000144]
• 90. Global and regional molecular epidemiology of HIV-1 among ... [https://aidsrestherapy.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12981-025-00776-y]
• 91. Novel Point-of-Care Technology Delivers Accurate HIV ... [https://www.mccormick.northwestern.edu/news/articles/2025/04/novel-point-of-care-technology-delivers-accurate-hiv-results-in-minutes/]
• 92. HIV-1 Genetic Diversity and Transmitted Drug Resistance ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/17/6/832]
• 93. Recombination in HIV: An Important Viral Evolutionary ... [https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/3/3/97-0301_article]
• 94. Reassortment Network of Influenza A Virus [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2021.793500/full]
• 95. In vivo emergence of an HIV-1/MO recombinant revealed ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31476379/]
• 96. Genetic Recombination between Human ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2258735/]
• 97. Multiple reassortment events in the evolutionary history of ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18463694/]
• 98. The evolution of HIV: Inferences using phylogenetics - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3258026/]
• 99. Challenges to the Development of Emerging Therapies [https://www.biopharminternational.com/view/challenges-to-the-development-of-emerging-therapies]
• 100. Identification of Multiple Unique HIV-1 Recombinant Forms in ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11911660/]
• 101. Avian Influenza Virus: Comparative Evolution as the Key ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/14/7/608]
• 102. Phylogeography and reassortment patterns of human ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-70023-3]
• 103. Weekly US Influenza Surveillance Report: Key Updates for ... [https://www.cdc.gov/fluview/surveillance/2025-week-45.html]
• 104. The Unprecedented Influenza Epidemic of 2024/2025 [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12631739/]
• 105. Development and verification of a novel tiling PCR method ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-03190-6]
• 106. Rational development of prophylactic HIV vaccines based ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264410X01003735]
• 107. Early influenza virus characterisation and vaccine ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12639273/]
• 108. Interim Effectiveness Estimates of 2025 Southern ... [https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/74/wr/mm7436a3.htm]
• 109. End-of-Season Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Against ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12390381/]
• 110. Advances in HIV Treatment and Vaccine Development [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12253998/]
• 111. Influenza Activity in the United States during the 2024–25 ... [https://www.cdc.gov/flu/whats-new/2025-2026-influenza-activity.html]
• 112. Preliminary Estimated Flu Disease Burden 2024-2025 ... [https://www.cdc.gov/flu-burden/php/data-vis/2024-2025.html]
• 113. Interim Estimates of 2024 – 2025 Vaccine... Seasonal Influenza [https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/74/wr/mm7406a2.htm]
• 114. Interference between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza B virus ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042682225001692]
• 115. HIV-1 and influenza antibodies: seeing antigens in new ways [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2796958/]
• 116. Cellular and Humoral Cross-Immunity against Two H3N2v ... [https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105651]
• 117. Humoral immune response following the inactivated ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264410X23006163]
• 118. Influenza vaccination for HIV-positive people: Systematic ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264410X18307436]
• 119. The emergence of drug resistant HIV variants and novel ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3695575/]
• 120. The Evolution of HIV-1 Drug Resistance and Genetic ... [https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/1204248]
• 121. The future of ART regimens for HIV is in long-acting agents [https://www.eatg.org/hiv-news/the-future-of-art-regimens-for-hiv-is-in-long-acting-agents/]
• 122. Gilead Presents New HIV Treatment and Cure Research ... [https://www.gilead.com/news/news-details/2025/gilead-presents-new-hiv-treatment-and-cure-research-data-at-croi-2025-including-an-investigational-long-acting-twice-yearly-therapy-option]
• 123. ViiV Healthcare presents new data demonstrating positive ... [https://viivhealthcare.com/hiv-news-and-media/news/press-releases/2025/july/long-acting-injectables-for-hiv-at-ias-2025/]
• 124. Are subtype differences important in HIV drug resistance? - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3951383/]
• 125. Universal type/subtype-specific antibodies for quantitative ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-18663-6]
• 126. Impact of HIV-1 viral subtype on disease progression and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2827379/]
• 127. Impacts of HIV-1 Subtype Diversity on Long-Term Clinical ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8900993/]
• 128. Patient Subtyping Analysis of Baseline Multi-omic Data ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11340208/]
• 129. HIV-1 subtype A1, D, and recombinant proviral genome ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-48985-9]
• 130. Changes in HIV-1 Subtypes/Sub- ... [https://weekly.chinacdc.cn/en/article/doi/10.46234/ccdcw2023.129]