Antiretroviral treatment of HIV-1 prevents transmission of HIV-1: Where do we go from here?

Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Electronic address: .
The Lancet (Impact Factor: 45.22). 10/2013; 382(9903). DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61998-4
Source: PubMed


Antiretroviral drugs that inhibit viral replication were expected to reduce transmission of HIV by lowering the concentration of HIV in the genital tract. In 11 of 13 observational studies, antiretroviral therapy (ART) provided to an HIV-infected index case led to greatly reduced transmission of HIV to a sexual partner. In the HPTN 052 randomised controlled trial, ART used in combination with condoms and counselling reduced HIV transmission by 96·4%. Evidence is growing that wider, earlier initiation of ART could reduce population-level incidence of HIV. However, the full benefits of this strategy will probably need universal access to very early ART and excellent adherence to treatment. Challenges to this approach are substantial. First, not all HIV-infected individuals can be located, especially people with acute and early infection who are most contagious. Second, the ability of ART to prevent HIV transmission in men who have sex with men (MSM) and people who use intravenous drugs has not been shown. Indeed, the stable or increased incidence of HIV in MSM in some communities where widespread use of ART has been established emphasises the concern that not enough is known about treatment as prevention for this crucial population. Third, although US guidelines call for immediate use of ART, such guidelines have not been embraced worldwide. Some experts do not believe that immediate or early ART is justified by present evidence, or that health-care infrastructure for this approach is sufficient. These concerns are very difficult to resolve. Ongoing community-based prospective trials of early ART are likely to help to establish the population-level benefit of ART, and-if successful-to galvanise treatment as prevention.

Download full-text


Available from: Kathryn E Muessig,
1 Follower
56 Reads
  • Source
    • "The public health benefit of TasP is not so clear and is being specifically addressed in 4 randomized trials being conducted in heterosexual populations in countries in sub-Saharan Africa with generalized epidemics [34, 35]. However, the incidence of HIV in gay and other MSM is rising in several countries that have robustly implemented ART programs, leading some experts to conclude that TasP alone will not eradicate HIV in these focused epidemics [33, 36, 37]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and treatment as prevention (TasP) involve the use of antiretroviral (ARV) drugs by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-negative and -positive individuals to reduce HIV acquisition and transmission, respectively. Clinical science has delivered a consistently high effect size for TasP and a range from 0%-73% reduction in incidence across placebo-controlled PrEP trials. However, the quality of evidence for PrEP compares favorably with evidence for postexposure prophylaxis (PEP). It is clear from treatment programs and PrEP trials that daily adherence presents challenges to a large proportion of the population. Although there are factors associated with inconsistent use (ie, younger age), they do not assist clinicians at the point of care. There are additional provider concerns about PrEP (covering cost of drug and delivery, undermining condom promotion, and facilitating resistant strains) that have delayed widespread acceptance. These issues need to be addressed in order to realize the full public health potential of antiretrovirals.
    Clinical Infectious Diseases 07/2014; 59 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S41-6. DOI:10.1093/cid/ciu297 · 8.89 Impact Factor

  • The Lancet 11/2013; 382(9906):1687-1688. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62377-6 · 45.22 Impact Factor

  • The Indian Journal of Medical Research 12/2013; 138(6):817-9. · 1.40 Impact Factor
Show more