Wednesday, March 14, 2012

An Analysis of PrEP Data and Decisions Taken in 2011

via Treatment Issues, by Deirdre Grant

More than a decade ago, “AIDS Drugs for Africa” was one of the rallying cries for a global activist movement.The meaning was simple: treat HIV-positive people with potent, life-saving medications regardless of where they live, how much money they have or who they love. These days, the phrase has more meanings than we could have ever imagined. The past two years have brought a range of data on the use of antiretrovirals for HIV prevention in HIV-negative people, as well as a preventive strategy in HIV-positive people. These developments are exciting, but the situation is far from simple. There are questions about feasibility and about levels of effectiveness observed in different trials. Today, many people want to know: Can antiretrovirals (ARVs) be used for HIV prevention in HIV-negative people? If so, which types of products, programs and for which populations is this prevention most effective?

The answers to these questions depend on several factors, including science, policy, funding, community demand, andthe future of treatment access for people with HIV. Not surprisingly, the possibility of using an ARV based prevention method in HIV-negative people generates strong opinions, both in favor of such a prevention tool and those opposed. In light of the potential, many questions have arisen including: Is it feasible? Will people actually use a pill or a gel once a day? Is it ethical, given the enduring need for ARVs for HIV-positive people worldwide? And, do we know enough from the trials to-date to describe levels of safety and effectiveness anticipated in a real world health care setting?

None of these questions have been completely answered. But over the past year, there has been a steady stream of developments that have both complicated and clarified the discussions. Mixed data on topical PrEP, such as the vaginal microbicide 1% tenofovir gel, and oral PrEP in women have left scientists and advocates perplexed. Many fear that the obstacles inherent in providing ARVs to HIVnegative people—repeated HIV testing, the need to ensure access for HIV-positive people, additional staffing requirements, and more—will overshadow the potential of these new tools. For advocates who want to see a full exploration of what ARV-based prevention can do in their communities, it’s as important as it has ever been to stay informed of developments as they emerge and maintain a firm pursuit of the ultimate goal: to curb the epidemic by preserving health in HIV-positive people and preventing as many new infections as possible.

Read the Rest.

[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...