Tag Archives: drugs

Another Major HIV Breakthrough

ProfLewin

Yesterday, the world was taken by storm when it was announced that a baby, born with HIV had been cured.  On the same day, it was announced a team from The Alfred hospital have uncovered HIV’s genetic hiding place and found a drug able to wake it up so that it can be destroyed.

The Alfred’s director of infectious diseases, Prof Sharon Lewin, said waking up HIV with doses of a highly toxic cancer drug was a huge step in curing a disease that has already claimed an estimated 30 million lives.

“What we thought would happen happened: the virus woke up, and we could measure it,” Prof Lewin said. “That is a big step.

“There are more possibilities of getting rid of it by making it visible to drugs and visible to the immune system (and) that we now know we can do.  Now the big challenge is working out, once it is visible, what are the ways to get rid of that infected cell.”

Traditional antiviral medications have been able to stop the virus infecting cells, giving patients a greater life expectancy.

But the virus remained “sleeping” in their DNA, unable to be found or treated, so patients had to take expensive medication daily to suppress its effects.

“It jumps in, buries itself into the DNA and sits there lurking. At any time, if the cell becomes active, the virus then becomes active,” Prof Lewin said.

“It is like having the embers of a fire sitting there . . . the minute you take away the anti-HIV drugs, the embers relight the fire and the whole thing gets going again.”

But by using cancer drug, Vorinostat, for two weeks, Prof Lewin had been able to turn on sleeping HIV-infected cells so they could be detected.

Researchers at The Alfred were able to bring the virus to notice in 18 of 20 HIV patients in a trial that concluded in January.

Prof Lewin hopes a new generation of drugs able to kick-start the immune system may now be able to kill the virus.

Prof Lewin and her team — which included collaboration with Monash University, the Burnet Institute, the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and the National Association of People Living with HIV/AIDS — will soon publish their full results.

For David Menadue, who has lived with HIV for almost 30 years, the results bring a new hope.

“Just having the existence of HIV in your body does do damage to your body every day. It puts pressure on your organs, your heart, your kidney, your liver.

“People with HIV would just love to get rid of this and go back to a normalised life. We are never really going to be able to get on top of the virus in developing countries without some sort of magical cure.”

Original Article via Herald Sun

Channel 4 news interviewed Professor Lewin yesterday, click here to see. (Sorry, we can’t embed this video)

Professor Lewin’s news isn’t new, she spoke about this at the 2012 CROI (Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections)  - He she speaks with Matt Sharp about HIV Latency and Eradication using Vorinostat.

STAY UPDATED
Follow LASS on Twitter

or subscribe via email

MEDICAL HISTORY – Child Born with HIV Cured!

cure

It’s all over the internet.. click here to see for yourselves…

Doctors in the US have made medical history by effectively curing a child born with HIV, the first time such a case has been documented.

The infant, who is now two and a half, needs no medication for HIV, has a normal life expectancy and is highly unlikely to be infectious to others, doctors believe.

Though medical staff and scientists are unclear why the treatment was effective, the surprise success has raised hopes that the therapy might ultimately help doctors eradicate the virus among newborns.

Doctors did not release the name or sex of the child to protect the patient’s identity, but said the infant was born, and lived, in Mississippi state. Details of the case were unveiled on Sunday at the Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections in Atlanta.

Dr Hannah Gay, who cared for the child at the University of Mississippi medical centre, told the Guardian the case amounted to the first “functional cure” of an HIV-infected child. A patient is functionally cured of HIV when standard tests are negative for the virus, but it is likely that a tiny amount remains in their body.

“Now, after at least one year of taking no medicine, this child’s blood remains free of virus even on the most sensitive tests available,” Gay said.

“We expect that this baby has great chances for a long, healthy life. We are certainly hoping that this approach could lead to the same outcome in many other high-risk babies,” she added.

The number of babies born with HIV in developed countries has fallen dramatically with the advent of better drugs and prevention strategies. Typically, women with HIV are given antiretroviral drugs during pregnancy to minimise the amount of virus in their blood. Their newborns go on courses of drugs too, to reduce their risk of infection further. The strategy can stop around 98% of HIV transmission from mother to child.

In the UK and Ireland, around 1,200 children are living with HIV they picked up in the womb, during birth, or while being breastfed. If an infected mother’s placenta is healthy, the virus tends not to cross into the child earlier in pregnancy, but can in labour and delivery.

The problem is far more serious in developing countries. In sub-Saharan Africa, around 387,500 children aged 14 and under were receiving antiretroviral therapy in 2010. Many were born with the infection. Nearly 2 million more children of the same age in the region are in need of the drugs.

In the latest case, the mother was unaware she had HIV until after a standard test came back positive while she was in labour. “She was too near delivery to give even the dose of medicine that we routinely use in labour. So the baby’s risk of infection was significantly higher than we usually see,” said Gay.

Doctors began treating the baby 30 hours after birth. Unusually, they put the child on a course of three antiretroviral drugs, given as liquids through a syringe. The traditional treatment to try to prevent transmission after birth is a course of a single antiretroviral drug. The doctor opted for the more aggressive treatment because the mother had not received any during her pregnancy.

Several days later, blood drawn from the baby before treatment started showed the child was infected, probably shortly before birth. The doctors continued with the drugs and expected the child to take them for life.

However, within a month of starting therapy, the level of HIV in the baby’s blood had fallen so low that routine lab tests failed to detect it.

The mother and baby continued regular clinic visits to the clinic for the next year, but then began to miss appointments, and eventually stopped attending all together. The child had no medication from the age of 18 months, and did not see doctors again until it was nearly two years old.

“We did not see this child at all for a period of about five months,” Gay told the Guardian. “When they did return to care aged 23 months, I fully expected that the baby would have a high viral load.”

When the mother and child arrived back at the clinic, Gay ordered several HIV tests, and expected the virus to have returned to high levels. But she was stunned by the results. “All of the tests came back negative, very much to my surprise,” she said.

The case was so extraordinary, Dr Gay called a colleague, Katherine Luzuriaga, an immunologist at Massachusetts Medical School, who with another scientist, Deborah Persaud at Johns Hopkins Children’s Centre in Baltimore, had far more sensitive blood tests to hand. They checked the baby’s blood and found traces of HIV, but no viruses that were capable of multiplying.

The team believe the child was cured because the treatment was so potent and given swiftly after birth. The drugs stopped the virus from replicating in short-lived, active immune cells, but another effect was crucial. The drugs also blocked the infection of other, long-lived white blood cells, called CD4, which can harbour HIV for years. These CD4 cells behave like hideouts, and can replace HIV that is lost when active immune cells die.

The treatment would not work in older children or adults because the virus will have already infected their CD4 cells.

“Prompt antiviral therapy in newborns that begins within days of exposure may help infants clear the virus and achieve long-term remission without lifelong treatment by preventing such viral hideouts from forming in the first place,” said Dr Persaud. “Our next step is to find out if this is a highly unusual response to very early antiretroviral therapy or something we can actually replicate in other high-risk newborns.”

Children infected with HIV are given antiretroviral drugs with the intent to treat them for life, and Gay warned that anyone who takes the drugs must remain on them.

“It is far too early for anyone to try stopping effective therapy just to see if the virus comes back,” she said.

Until scientists better understand how they cured the child, Gay emphasised that prevention is the most reliable way to stop babies contracting the virus from infected mothers. “Prevention really is the best cure, and we already have proven strategies that can prevent 98% of newborn infections by identifying and treating HIV-positive women,” she said.

Genevieve Edwards, a spokesperson for the Terrence Higgins Trust HIV/Aids charity, said: “This is an interesting case, but I don’t think it has implications for the antenatal screening programme in the UK, because it already takes steps to ensure that 98% to 99% of babies born to HIV-positive mothers are born without HIV.”

Original Article via The Guardian

STAY UPDATED
Follow LASS on Twitter
or subscribe via email

Anti-HIV drug effort in South Africa yields dramatic results

indinavir-capsules-250x250

An intensive campaign to combat HIV/AIDS with costly antiretroviral drugs in rural South Africa has increased life expectancy by more than 11 years and significantly reduced the risk of infection for healthy individuals, according to new research.

The two studies, published Thursday in the journal Science, come as wealthy Western nations are debating how best to stretch limited AIDS funding at a time of economic stress.

With an annual price tag of $500 to $900 per patient, antiretroviral therapy programs have stirred frequent debate. Critics argue that adherence to the drug regimen is low and social stigma prevents some from seeking care until they are very ill and have infected others. Cheaper remedies, such as condom distribution, male circumcision and behavior modification, deserve more attention and funding, they say.

The new economic analysis of a $10.8-million campaign in KwaZulu-Natal province concluded that the drug scale-up there had been highly cost-effective.

The program was administered by nurses in rural health clinics in an impoverished region of about 100,000 people. Treatment consisted primarily of daily doses of antiretroviral therapy, or ART, drugs, which patients take every day for their entire lives. Patients picked up their medication at a rural clinic once a month.

In 2003, the year before the drugs were available, 29% of all residents were infected with HIV and half of all deaths there were caused by AIDS. Life expectancy in the region was just over 49 years.

By 2011, life expectancy had grown to 60 1/2 years — “the most rapid life expectancy gains observed in the history of public health,” said study senior author Till Barnighausen, a global health professor at the Harvard School of Public Health.

Based on that increase in longevity, researchers determined just how many years of life were effectively “gained” among residents as a result of ART intervention. They used that figure and the total expense of the program to calculate a cost-effectiveness ratio of $1,593 per life-year saved.

The World Health Organization considers medical intervention to be “highly cost-effective” if the cost per year of life saved is less than a nation’s per capita gross domestic product. The program’s ratio was well below South Africa’s 2011 per capita GDP of about $11,000.

“It’s really a slam dunk of an intervention,” said study leader Jacob Bor, a graduate student at Harvard. “These investments are worthwhile.”

The research team noted that the study period coincided with the arrival of electric power and clean water for area residents. But those alone could not explain the dramatic increase in longevity, they said.

“While mortality due to HIV declined precipitously, mortality due to other causes flat-lined,” Bor said. “These changes were almost certainly due to ART scale-up.”

In a second study from the same region, researchers followed nearly 17,000 healthy people from 2004 to 2011 to determine HIV infection rates in areas with active ART intervention programs.

Healthy individuals in those areas were 38% less likely to contract HIV than people in areas where ART drugs were not widely available, researchers found. People in extremely rural areas also fared better than those in more closely populated areas clustered around national roads.

Overall HIV prevalence increased 6% during the seven years of the study, probably because the antiretroviral drugs allowed people with the virus to live longer, according to the report.

It’s not clear how the results of the new study would translate to areas where stable, cohabiting couples were not the norm, said lead author Frank Tanser, an epidemiologist at the University of KwaZulu-Natal.

AIDS researchers who weren’t involved in the studies said they provide strong support for maintaining programs like the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, begun by President George W. Bush in 2003.

“These papers present truly remarkable data,” said Dr. Douglas Richman, director of the Center for AIDS Research at UC San Diego.

Original article via Gawker

STAY UPDATED
Follow LASS on Twitter

or subscribe via email

Treating TB, HIV at same time found to save lives

Diane Havlir, MD poses for a portriat on the hallways of the AIDS ward at San Francisco General Hospital on Nov. 25, 2008.

Treating tuberculosis and HIV infections at the same time can be a challenge for patients and their doctors, but attacking both diseases early and aggressively isn’t harmful and could save the lives of those who are sickest, according to a global study led by UCSF researchers.

Tuberculosis is the main cause of death among people with HIV and AIDS worldwide, killing about 400,000 people every year. But how to best treat both conditions has been unclear, because of worries about how the drugs will interact and the burden that dual treatment puts on patients, who must take dozens of pills every day with some gruelling side effects.

The study, published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine, found that patients whose immune systems have been most damaged by HIV benefited by beginning antiretroviral drugs two weeks after starting TB treatment, instead of waiting eight to 12 weeks, as is commonly done now. Those patients were 40 percent less likely to die or develop AIDS.

“Clinicians have been completely unsure of the best time to start HIV therapy in these patients. It was important to know whether we should start HIV therapy early, and now we know it’s worth it,” said Dr. Diane Havlir, chief of the UCSF HIV/AIDS division at San Francisco General Hospital and lead author of the study.

“It’s a tough treatment, but it gives significant medical benefits and it’s lifesaving,” Havlir said.

Tuberculosis is a global epidemic, with more than 9.4 million new cases worldwide every year. HIV-positive people, whose weakened immune systems leave them vulnerable to secondary infections, are especially at risk for contracting the disease.

Almost a quarter of people with HIV infections have tuberculosis, and they are more than 20 times more likely to contract active forms of tuberculosis – meaning they’re symptomatic, and not just harbouring the latent bacteria – than healthy individuals.

TB isn’t nearly as common in the United States as it is in other parts of the world, but it’s enough of a concern that HIV-positive people are tested regularly for tuberculosis, and people diagnosed with TB always get tested for HIV right away.

Tuberculosis is curable, but the regimen used to treat it requires strict adherence to several different medications for at least six months. Patients who don’t stick to the treatment plan run the risk of developing drug-resistant TB, which is far more difficult to cure and can be spread to others. They also remain infectious for a longer period of time.

Treating multiple infections

Meanwhile, antiretroviral drugs, while very effective at suppressing HIV infections and allowing the immune system to rebuild and strengthen, can also be brutal to take. Doctors have worried about the two drug therapies counteracting each other or causing serious side effects in combination.

Plus, if it’s difficult for patients to stick with the drug regimen for one disease, it would be even more challenging for two diseases, public health experts say. So health care providers have been reluctant to tackle both HIV and TB at the same time, usually opting to treat the TB first – because it’s so infectious – and add the antiretroviral drugs several weeks or months later.

The UCSF study, along with two similar studies also published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Wednesday, makes it clear that patients are better off aggressively treating their HIV infection soon after starting TB therapy.

“The default position has been ‘let’s get the active infection under control and worry about HIV later,’ and that’s the wrong answer,” said Dr. Andrew Zolopa, director of the Stanford Positive Care Clinic. He has studied how best to treat HIV and other infections, although not tuberculosis, and found similar results.

The UCSF study followed 809 patients on five continents, mostly in Africa, for 48 weeks. Each of the patients was newly diagnosed with HIV and had not yet started antiretroviral therapy, and had either a confirmed or suspected case of tuberculosis.

Similar side effects

Patients were randomly assigned to start antiretroviral therapy either two weeks after beginning TB treatment or eight to 12 weeks after. Patients aren’t started on both therapies at the same time because the side effects of TB treatment can be severe, although they usually fade after one to two weeks.

Study subjects who started therapy earlier were more likely to develop an inflammatory condition that required additional treatment, but otherwise they had roughly the same number and types of side effects as patients who received the later therapy.

At the end of the study, healthier patients who started HIV treatment earlier were no better off than those who started later. But among the sickest patients, 16 percent of those who were treated earlier had died or developed AIDS within a year, compared with 27 percent of those who got the later treatment.

The sickest patients had T-cell counts – a measure of the strength of the immune system – below 50 at the start of the study; a healthy individual will have a T-cell count of at least 600.

“It might be safe to wait for treatment in some cases,” said Dr. Warner Greene, director of the Gladstone Institute of Virology and Immunology. “But if the (T-cell) count is too low, you’re obligated to treat early now.”

Original Article by Erin Allday via SFGate.com

STAY UPDATED

or subscribe via email

Doctors Criticise London HIV Drugs Cost-Cutting Deal

Medical professionals and patient support groups have raised concerns after people with HIV in London have been asked to switch to taking different antiretroviral drugs, as part of cost-cutting measures.

In April, London HIV Consortium, which is responsible for the capital’s HIV services, was tasked with saving £8m over two years, having to manage growing patient numbers on a budget that has not increased in line with inflation.

London Specialised Commissioning Group (LSCG), which commissions the capital’s HIV treatment, negotiated terms with atazanavir manufacturer Bristol Myers Squibb to receive discounts for larger orders of the drug.

As a result, clinics have been given new “prescription messages” – recommending doctors ask certain HIV patients who take a life-saving protease inhibitor other than atazanavir to switch to atazanavir – with saving money given as the overriding justification.

But now HIV doctors and support groups have raised concerns that switching prescriptions creates “medical risks” and raises “ethical issues”.

LSCG HIV drugs commissioner Claire Foreman said: “It is not in anyone’s interest – not our patients nor the taxpayer – to treat fewer people with more expensive drugs.

“There are no financial incentives for clinics to switch patients.”

No HIV patient will be prescribed an incorrect medicine as a result of this process” – Claire Foreman, Lead commissioner, LSCG

However, an HIV specialist at a London clinic, who wanted to remain anonymous, told the BBC: “Clinics are under financial pressure to contribute to the £8m savings.

“A confidential statement went out to doctors saying ‘there is a carrot and sticks approach to this. If you reach your targets each individual service will be set, there will be benefits for you this year, and clearly be benefits for you in next year’s budget’,” he added.

“Claire Foreman has back-pedalled on this.”

Ms Foreman denied this allegation, adding: “Doctors are taking a leading role to ensure patients can be treated despite the pressure on budgets.”  The clinician added it was “clearly evident” if doctors did not meet targets for patients switching to atazanavir.

“Doctors are under pressure from the LSCG to get patients to swap to cheaper prescriptions.  I’m not sure if it was taken into account the pressure that would put clinicians under,” he added.  “Not only does that discomfort the patient, it’s costing us in terms of clinic visits.”

Ms Foreman said this was not the case, adding: “No HIV patient will be prescribed an incorrect medicine as a result of this process.”

The anonymous specialist went on to say: “It’s difficult to prescribe certain pills in London, that people outside London can get, due to financial pressure from doctors’ managers.”

Patient Choice

LSCG said its prescription messages were in line with British HIV Association guidelines, but these were last updated in 2008 so did not consider drugs licensed since then.

More recent guidelines, including those of the European AIDS Clinical Society, recommend a range of drugs which are available through the NHS but are not suggested for prescription in LSCG’s messages.

However the specialist cited raltegravir as an example of an antiretroviral drug “that everyone wants access to, because it has few side-effects.

AHPN chief Francis Kaikumba fears African communities will be adversely affected

“But commissioners have stated it will only be used under certain circumstances.

“That’s entirely down to cost pressures. It would be easier to get outside London,” he said.  The specialist added: “The prescription messages stop putting patient choice at the centre of care in London.”

“This could potentially damage doctor-patient relationships.”

LSCG said: “All standard of care drugs licensed in the UK are available for use by HIV doctors.”

Dr Mike Youle, an HIV consultant at north London’s Royal Free Hospital, told the BBC about potential ethical and medical implications of switching patients’ prescription.

“When you’re talking about someone who has been stable on a drug for five years, I see no medical reason to change their prescription,” he said.

“There’s an ethical issue about switching people.”

But Prof Brian Gazzard, chairman of the drug purchasing group which advised the consortium, said: “All the doctor needs to do is note the reason the patient doesn’t want to switch.”

Meanwhile, African Health Policy Network chief Francis Kaikumba said: “Vulnerable African communities will be adversely affected as studies have shown African people are far less likely to question their health advisors.”

Ms Foreman said: “Clinicians and commissioners have been clear that any targeting would be unacceptable.”

Side Effects

Addressing the medical implications, Dr Youle said: “Every time you change medication with HIV, you run two risks.  One is having a side-effect. Something might go wrong.  The second is you might fail on the next drug. The virus might be resistant and you may put your health at risk.”

Prof Gazzard said: “Switching can involve side effects. If it does the patient will be told ‘we’ll switch you back’.”

Switching HIV drugs can involve side effects

Dr Yusef Azad, from the National Aids Trust, highlighted emotional pressures patients might come under saying: “With HIV, daily adherence is vital. Concerns about their medication might undermine a patient’s willingness to adhere to treatment.”

Prof Gazzard said: “If stress is being introduced into that system it’s a problem between the doctor and patient, not the London Consortium.”

Meanwhile, Dr Youle asked: “What happens when the next tender goes out and a different drug becomes the cheapest?”  You then have to say the drug you were originally on is cheaper and we’re going to move you back.”

Prof Gazzard said: “There will be a balance between the saving and the difficulties of switching people every two years.”

Some HIV support groups have said the deals between the LSCG and pharmaceutical companies were rushed through.

Robert Fieldhouse, editor of Baseline, a magazine for people living with HIV, said: “The consultation took place behind closed doors with the wider HIV community in the dark.”

But Ms Foreman said: “Commercially confidential processes mean specific prices of companies cannot be shared.”

Dr Asad said a wider debate should have been had before procurement.  “It would have been better to have a more open discussion earlier – asking ‘is it ok to switch stable patients simply on the basis of cost?’,” he said.

Meanwhile, with the government’s Health and Social Care Bill proposing to shake-up the way the NHS in England works, London’s HIV drugs procurement will be closely scrutinised to see how money savings could be implemented on a wider scale.

Original Article By Andy Dangerfield via BBC News

STAY UPDATED
or subscribe via email

Pill-Popping Reminder App for iOS!

Pill-Popping Reminder App Keeps You Out of the Hospital

So you know what happens if you don’t take your meds and you probably have one (or a dozen) pill box’s lying around somewhere and you even know a bit more about how HIV meds work.  All this knowledge is useless if you forget to take your meds but how to do you stay on top of it all when you’ve got so many other things to remember?

Any alarm system will do to remind you, be it an alarm clock, a watch or even a significant other.  Taking the correct medication at the right time can mean the difference between a nice evening in or a night in hospital and fortunately  for iOS users,there’s an app for that!

With the RxmindMe app, you’ll know when to take your drugs even when you’re out and about.

You’ve seen the translucent boxes with the compartments marked for each day of the week at the pharmacy and the free RxmindMe app (Android version is coming soon) is an extension to that simple system. The app not only reminds users to take their meds, it can be used to track prescriptions and store information about your doctor and pharmacy.

The app includes access to the FDA Drug Database so users can keep abreast of the medications they’re taking. And to help cut down on the confusion of look-alike pills, the app features the ability to photograph your pills.

STAY UPDATED
Follow LASS on Twitter
or subscribe via email

Antiretroviral Drugs Work – This Is Why You Should Take Them!

In light of yesterday’s news which reported that three people died after they stopped taking antiretroviral medicine on the advice of a religious leader, it’s important to highlight why anti-HIV drugs are significant and how essential it is to take them correctly.

HIV is a virus which attacks the immune system – the body’s defence system against infection and illness. If you have HIV, you can take drugs to reduce the level of HIV in your body. By reducing the amount of HIV in your body, you can slow or prevent damage to your immune system. These drugs are not a cure, but they can help you stay well and extend your life. Anti-HIV drugs are known as antiretroviral drugs.

HIV mainly infects cells in the immune system called CD4 cells. Over many years of HIV infection, the number of CD4 cells drops gradually but continually and the immune system is weakened. If nothing is done to slow or halt this destruction of the immune system, a condition called AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) follows, as the immune system is no longer able to fight infections. Antiretroviral drugs work by interrupting this process.

An untreated person with HIV may have thousands or even millions of HIV particles in every millilitre of blood. The aim of treatment is to reduce the amount of HIV to very low levels (this is called an ‘undetectable’ level) – below 50 copies per millilitre of blood, although some HIV treatment centres are now using tests that can measure as low as 40 copies/ml.

To provide you with the best chance of reducing the amount of HIV in your blood to very low levels, your doctor will recommend that you take a powerful combination of at least three antiretroviral drugs. Once your viral load – the amount of HIV in your blood – has dropped, your immune system should begin to recover and your ability to fight infections is likely to improve.

When you start or change a drug combination, a viral load and CD4 count will be done within the first month of treatment. This is to check that the drugs are working. Testing is generally performed every three months, although some doctors may perform tests more often to begin with and less frequently once you are well established on treatment and doing well.

Once you are on HIV treatment, you may have tests to measure liver and kidney function and fat and sugar levels in your blood, to assess the effects of the drugs on the normal workings of your body.

Your HIV care will also involve a number of other routine tests. These will be to monitor your general health and to see if your treatment is causing any side-effects.

It is very important not to miss doses of your anti-HIV drugs and to take them exactly as prescribed. If you miss doses, or you do not take the drugs as you are supposed to, the HIV in your body is more likely to develop resistance to them. This will reduce their long-term effectiveness.

The above information is taken from NAM’s “Anti-HIV Drugs” booklet which you can download from here, (or pick up a copy from LASS, next time you’re in)  Additionally, Uptodate.com has very useful information and tips for taking HIV meds, it’s always a good idea to refresh your knowledge on Adherence.

Having a daily timetable for taking medication and taking all doses exactly as prescribed is the traditional definition of adherence, also known as compliance. This may sound simple, but in the case of highly active antiretroviral treatment (HAART), it is not. The challenge only increases as people who are infected and able to access therapy face life-long treatment and side-effect management.

If some medications are not taken at the correct time interval, the drug level can either be too high (causing unnecessary toxicities or side-effects) or too low (encouraging viral resistance). From a public health standpoint, suboptimal adherence also increases both the risk of transmission and the risk of transmitting drug-resistant virus to others.

Correctly taken, highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) maintains a consistent attack on HIV. When drug levels in the body fluctuate, HIV is given the opportunity to reproduce. Ongoing replication permits drug-resistant viral strains to develop and this narrows future treatment options.

Beyond personal benefit, maintaining adherence and viral suppression has a public health benefit. When viral load is low, so is the likelihood of transmission to others.

For more details on adherence or HIV medicines, speak with your doctor and health care professionals.

Philadelphia FIGHT (Field Initiating Group for HIV Trials) is a comprehensive AIDS service organization providing education, advocacy and research on potential treatments and vaccines. FIGHT was formed as a partnership of individuals living with HIV/AIDS and clinicians, who joined together to improve the lives of people living with HIV. They produce educational videos via “The AIDS Library” and serves the community through delivery of information on HIV, such as treatments, nutrition, and history of the pandemic, and referrals to regional and national resources.

The following videos are a 30 minute presentation on How HIV Meds work,

How HIV Meds Work Part 1: HIV Life Cycle

How HIV Meds Work Part 2: Drug Classes

How HIV Meds Work Part 3: Timing

Source material for this article via NAM, BBC News, Uptodate.com, Avert.com, Bupa and Philadelphia FIGHT

STAY UPDATED
or subscribe via email
 

Pill Box Organisers Increase HIV Patients’ Adherence & Improve Viral Suppression

Inexpensive pill box organisers are an easy, successful, and cost-effective tool to help patients take their medications as prescribed, according to a study of low-income urban residents living with HIV infection.

“Clinicians and pharmacists can meaningfully improve treatment outcomes with simple and inexpensive strategies, such as pill box organisers, to help people organize how they take medication,” said senior author David Bangsberg, MD, MPH, of UCSF.

Incomplete adherence to HIV therapy is the most common cause of incomplete viral suppression, drug resistance, disease progression, and death among people living with HIV/AIDS. The subjects of this study, who were recruited from homeless shelters, free food programs, and single-room occupancy hotels, are thought to be at elevated risk for poor adherence partly because of the high rates of substance abuse, untreated mental illness, and unstable housing.

Patients in this difficult-to-treat population were given inexpensive pill box organisers to use with their antiretroviral medications. Study organisers made a total of 3,170 unannounced visits every three to six weeks to the subjects’ places of residence and compared the number of pills remaining in the patients’ possession with the number that would be expected to remain if the patients were perfectly compliant with the treatment regimen.

Pill box organisers were associated with a 4 percent improvement in adherence, 0.12 log reduction in HIV viral load, and an estimated 11 percent reduction in the risk of progression to clinical AIDS. As pill boxes are low cost, this intervention was highly cost-effective.

“While this population has often been regarded as having difficulty with adherence,” the authors write, “adherence problems are by no means limited to patients with low socioeconomic status.” Lead author Maya Petersen, PhD, from the Berkeley School of Public Health, adds, “Incomplete adherence is a major problem that prevents people from realizing the full benefits of a wide range of treatments for chronic diseases, such as hypertension and diabetes mellitus. Thus, the findings of this study have the potential to inform a wide range of diseases, not just HIV.

“It would be interesting to explore whether changes in packaging or delivery of antiretrovirals and other drugs could be used to reproduce the benefits of pill box organiser use. One model to consider is oral contraceptive therapy, which is routinely dispensed using labeled blister packs, a kind of pre-packaged version of a pill box. Antiretroviral regimens are generally more complicated, but a modification of this general model at either a pharmacy or manufacturer level might be possible, with wide-ranging patient benefits.”

Original Article adapted by ScienceDaily from materials provided by Infectious Diseases Society of America,

STAY UPDATED

or subscribe via email

HIV and TB activist Winstone Zulu has Died

The prominent HIV and TB activist Winstone Zulu has died at the age of 47 in hospital in Lusaka.

Mr Zulu was diagnosed with HIV in 1990 and was the first person in Zambia to make a public statement about his HIV status.

He began to take antiretroviral treatment in 1996 and contracted tuberculosis in 1997. After effective treatment for TB he became one of the first HIV activists to champion the need to address TB. One of 13 children, Winstone Zulu lost four brothers and two sisters-in-law to TB between 1990 and 2003.

Not only was Winstone Zulu a hero in the fight against AIDS, but he was also a pioneer in bringing AIDS activism to the hitherto barren and civil society free zone of tuberculosis prevention, treatment, and care,” said Mark Harrington, executive director of Treatment Action Group.

“Winstone was lovely, a courageous, insightful, gentle and eloquent activist and a real pioneer of the HIV and TB access movements for Africans in Africa. He was also that rare thing, a heterosexual man who was honest, wise and funny about male sexuality. He didn’t just defy three epidemic diseases (he had polio as well as HIV and TB), he also survived AIDS denialism,” said Gus Cairns of NAM.

Winstone Zulu stopped HIV medication in 2000 after encountering AIDS denialist views that HIV did not cause AIDS.  He resumed treatment in 2002 after a huge decline in his CD4 cell count left him once again seriously ill.

He continued to play a prominent role in AIDS and TB activism and was praised by Nelson Mandela as a pioneer of TB activism at the 2004 World AIDS Conference. In 2006 he was awarded the Stop TB Partnership Kochon prize for his contribution to TB control.

Speaking at numerous international conferences and events, Winstone sounds the alarm on the links between HIV/AIDS and TB and advocates for increased financial resources and improved programs to combat TB and TB-HIV. During recent trips to Japan, Winstone has garnered over a dozen media hits, including several front page articles in major outlets, particularly around his meetings with the then Prime Minister of Japan and the current Deputy Prime Minister.

Winstone’s experiences and actions make him a leader in TB advocacy and speak volumes to the social attention and political will that can be generated by just one individual using his voice.

In the following video, Winstone addresses the TED conference on 8th October 2008.

“Winstone Zulu worked tirelessly to change the world, at no small cost to his own health and wellbeing,” said Mark Harrington. “His legacy is a stronger link between HIV and TB activists, but his inimitable calm and passionate voice of reason will be deeply missed.

Winstone Zulu is survived by his wife Vivian and their four children.

Original Articles via NAM and Action.org

STAY UPDATED
Follow LASS on Twitter
or subscribe via email

Gonorrhea Possibly Becoming ‘Untreatable’

The leading gonorrhea antibiotic cefixime has become less effective over the past few years, a new study has shown.

The HPA’s annual Gonococcal Resistance to Antimicrobials Surveillance Programme report revealed a decline in susceptibility to the drug, in some cases leading to treatment failure.

Lab tests on gonorrhoea bacteria samples taken in 2010 showed that 17.4% had a reduced susceptibility to cefixime, up from 10.6% the year before.

The first cases of bacteria with reduced susceptibility to the antibiotic were noted in 2006.  Doctors treating gonorrhoea patients are now advised to no longer use cefixime as their first choice.

Rather, they are recommended to use a mix of two drugs: ceftriaxone, an antibiotic which is injected, and azithromycin, which can be taken orally.

Prof Cathy Ison

Professor Cathy Ison, a gonorrhoea expert at the HPA, said: “Our lab tests have shown a dramatic reduction in the sensitivity of the drug we were using as the main treatment for gonorrhoea. This presents the very real threat of untreatable gonorrhoea in the future.

“We were so worried by the results we were seeing that we recommended that guidelines on the treatment of gonorrhoea were revised in May this year, to recommend a more effective drug.

“But this won’t solve the problem, as history tells us that resistance to this therapy will develop too. In the absence of any new alternative treatments for when this happens, we will face a situation where gonorrhoea cannot be cured.”

“Many patients may feel anxious about having an injection, but this is now the best way of avoiding treatment failure. Patients who refuse the jab will be offered oral antibiotics instead”.

“This highlights the importance of practising safe sex, as, if new antibiotic treatments can’t be found, this will be only way of controlling this infection in the future.”

After genital chlamydia, gonorrhoea is the second most common bacterial sexually transmitted infection in the UK.  (The first being Chlamydia)

According to HPA figures, there were 16,145 new diagnoses of gonorrhoea in 2010, a 3% increase on 2009 when there were 15,606.

Original Articles via BBC News and Nursing Times

STAY UPDATED
Follow LASS on Twitter
or subscribe via email