Trial reportViral immunology2015
A lower viral set point but little immunological impact after early treatment during primary HIV infection.
Trial report in Viral immunology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Primo-SHM trial, a multicenter randomized trial comparing no treatment with 24 or 60 weeks of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) during primary human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection (PHI), recently demonstrated that temporary early cART lowered the viral set point and deferred the need for re-initiation of cART during chronic HIV infection. This study examined whether the beneficial effect of early treatment was caused by preservation of immunological responses. Twenty-seven treated and 20 untreated PHI individuals participating in the Primo-SHM trial were compared at viral set point, that is, 36 weeks after baseline or after treatment interruption, respectively, for a diverse set of immunological parameters. The results show no differences between treated and untreated individuals at the level of effector T-cell formation or replication capacity of the T-cells; regulation of various T, B, natural killer, or dendritic cells; polyfunctionality of the CD8 T-cells; preservation of CD4 T-cells in the gut associated lymphoid tissue; or immune activation. There were subtle differences in the quality of the cytolytic CD4 T-cell response: 11% (median) of CD4 T-cells of the early treated individuals produced the cytolytic molecule perforin compared to 5% in untreated individuals (p=0.046), and treatment caused a modest increase in CD4 T-cells expressing both perforin and granzyme B (median 9% vs. 4% of CD4 T-cells; p=0.045). Early treatment had a modest positive effect on the quality of the CD4 T-cell response. It remains unclear, however, whether these subtle immunological differences were the cause or a result of the lower viral set point in patients who received early treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.