PubMed · 15497326
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Ulrike Holzgrabe. 2004. [Flexibility in avoiding resistance].. https://doi.org/10.1002/pauz.200490096
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: HIV proviral sequencing overcomes the limit of plasma viral load requirement by detecting all the 'archived mutations', but the clinical relevance remains to be evaluated. METHODS: We included 25 participants with available proviral sequences (both intact and defective sequences available) and utilized the genotypic sensitivity score (GSS) to evaluate the level of resistance in their provirus and plasma virus. Defective sequences were further categorized as sequences with and without hypermutations. Personalized GSS score and total GSS score were calculated to evaluate the level of resistance to a whole panel of antiretroviral therapies and to certain antiretroviral therapy that a participant was using. The rate of sequences with drug resistance mutations (DRMs) within each sequence compartment (intact, defective and plasma viral sequences) was calculated for each participant. RESULTS: Defective proviral sequences harbored more DRMs than other sequence compartments, with a median DRM rate of 0.25 compared with intact sequences (0.0, P = 0.014) and plasma sequences (0.095, P = 0.30). Defective sequences with hypermutations were the major source of DRMs, with a median DRM rate of 1.0 compared with defective sequences without hypermutations (0.042, P < 0.001). Certain Apolipoprotein B Editing Complex 3-related DRMs including reverse transcriptase gene mutations M184I, E138K, M230I, G190E and protease gene mutations M46I, D30N were enriched in hypermutated sequences but not in intact sequences or plasma sequences. All the hypermutated sequences had premature stop codons due to Apolipoprotein B Editing Complex 3. CONCLUSION: Proviral sequencing may overestimate DRMs as a result of hypermutations. Removing hypermutated sequences is essential in the interpretation of proviral drug resistance testing.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the financial incentives that companies have to treat HIV-infected employees, in a health care services company in Kampala, Uganda. DESIGN: Cost-benefit analysis from the company's perspective of three interventions to treat HIV-infected employees. METHODS: The costs and benefits of each intervention were compared with no intervention and with each other: cotrimoxazole prophylaxis (CTX) starting at WHO stage 2; highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) plus CTX starting at WHO stage 2; and a 'hybrid' strategy that begins with CTX at WHO stage 2 and later includes HAART. The 5-year health and economic outcomes were calculated using a Markov model. Inputs for disease progression rates and effects of HIV on company costs were derived from published and unpublished data and a survey administered to company officers. RESULTS: The analysis showed that the 'hybrid' intervention is the most cost-effective. For 100 skilled employees it would save the company 38,939 US dollars and 73 disability adjusted life-years (DALYs). For unskilled workers 'CTX' is the most cost effective and would save 16,417 US dollars and 60 DALYs. 'Hybrid' has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 45 US dollars per DALY for unskilled workers whereas HAART is far less economical at an incremental cost per DALY of 4118 US dollars. For 'CTX', net savings are preserved across the full range of input values. CONCLUSION: A 'hybrid' intervention combining CTX prophylaxis followed by HAART would generate savings to a Ugandan company. Governments and other donors may find opportunities to share costs with the private sector as part of their phase-in strategy for antiretroviral therapy.
With an estimated 5 million adults and children newly infected worldwide in 2005, research into new HIV prevention technologies and approaches is urgently needed. Prompted by the heated debate in 2004 about trials of tenofovir for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis, UNAIDS initiated a year-long process to promote effective partnerships between researchers and civil society in HIV prevention trials, culminating in the 'Creating effective partnerships for HIV prevention trials' consultation in June 2005. Key stakeholders, including researchers, activists, ethicists, government officials, international agencies, civil society, trial participants, sponsors and funders addressed a wide range of issues concerning the rapidly evolving and sometimes tense dynamics of HIV prevention research partnerships. Implementation of the technical and procedural recommendations from this consultation requires collaboration, commitment and a willingness to experiment with new approaches and work with new partners. Researchers, donors, governments, community groups and activists must all be willing to define responsibilities and be held accountable for their contributions to HIV prevention research partnerships, weighing and balancing gains against the costs of time, money, and capacity as the HIV epidemic progresses.