Comments on abstract, title, references

The title of this article is well written and in accordance with the aim of the study. The author explain how they collected, processed and analyzed all samples clearly. The way the author conclude this whole study is well written in the abstract. The references are all relevant with present study and key studies in this field are also well listed. but in the abstract I didn't find the importance why the author choose to study TDR among ART naive HIV patients

Comments on introduction/background

It is clear that HIV is classified into HIV-1 and HIV-2 type and among HIV-1 type there are many subtypes and recombinant found worldwide. It is also clearly stated in the introduction that in Indonesia, the recombinant subtype found were CRF01_AE. The author also refers to a previous publication that there was antiretroviral drug resistance found among HV-1 patient worldwide included those living in Indonesia. But the number of study about HIV-1 subtype and drug resistance status in Indonesia is limited. Thus, they found it important to conduct an epidemiological study and monitor the prevalence of drug resistance in HVI-1 infected patients. But the atuhor didn't show from other studies the comparison between the prevalence of TDR to those in ADR (acquired drug resistance). If the number of TDR is quite high compare to those in ADR it make sense to conduct similar study in indonesia, where as it is mention by author the number of such information is limitted.

Comments on methodology

The author stated the inclusion criteria for choosing group samples. They analyzed the HIV-1 gene fragment and analyzed it clearly so that it is clear how they can get the data and conclude it to answer the aim of this study. They write the methods in detail so that it can be replicated by other studies in the same field. They used the method for amplification, sequencing and analysis drug resistance mutation in a reliable and valid way. But unfortunately the author didn't mention the inclusion criteria used in this study? and the reason why they collected data only from CSW and IDU patients

Comments on data and results

Tables and figures are clearly presented and relevant to this study. Titles, column and row labelled correctly. The results showed meaningful result and it is as expected. There were drug resistance mutations in reverse transcriptase gene which is the target region for first line regimen therapy. Since in this manuscript they wanted to study TDR among ARV, the author didn't mention the ARV regimen used in this subjected HIV patients? All patients were in first line regimen or several patient already in second line regimen?

Comments on discussion and conclusions

The results were discussed from multiple perspectives by citing several references relevant to the current study. The conclusion has also answered the aim of the present study and supported by the presented results and citing references. The current study opens for further monitoring in the future study to conclude the prevalence of drug resistance mutations in a timely manner. In this discussion section it should be noted that for future study plan, it is better to include not only CSW and IDU but also other individuals with high risk of HIV.