ArticleJournal of medical ethics2017
Why cure, why now?
Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Promising Stem Cell therapy in the Management of HIV and AIDS: A Narrative Review.Biologics : targets & therapy · 2022Review
- Ethical considerations for HIV remission clinical research involving participants diagnosed during acute HIV infection.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- Article
- Differences in HIV cure clinical trial preferences of French people living with HIV and physicians in the ANRS-APSEC study: a discrete choice experiment.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2020Article
- Indirect Benefits in HIV Cure Clinical Research: A Qualitative Analysis.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2019Article
- Maximising the global health impact of future HIV cure-related interventions through advance planning.Journal of virus eradication · 2018Article
- Invited Commentary on Dubé et al. (Perceptions of Equipoise, Risk/Benefit Ratios, and "Otherwise Healthy Volunteers" in the Context of Early-Phase HIV Cure Research in the United States-A Qualitative Inquiry): Are HIV-Infected Candidates for Participation in Risky Cure-Related Studies Otherwise Healthy?Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2018Article
- Perceptions of Equipoise, Risk-Benefit Ratios, and "Otherwise Healthy Volunteers" in the Context of Early-Phase HIV Cure Research in the United States: A Qualitative Inquiry.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2018Article
- "We Need to Deploy Them Very Thoughtfully and Carefully": Perceptions of Analytical Treatment Interruptions in HIV Cure Research in the United States-A Qualitative Inquiry.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2018Article
- Research on HIV cure: Mapping the ethics landscape.PLoS medicine · 2017Article
- HIV Infection of Macrophages: Implications for Pathogenesis and Cure.Pathogens & immunity · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) is highly effective at preventing morbidity and mortality due to infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), but does not eradicate the virus. Consequently, cART must be administered life-long. Recent progress has stimulated research towards a cure of HIV infection. Approaches under investigation include hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, latency reactivating agents, immune based therapies, and cell-based therapies. Each of these approaches carries potential risks that must be weighed against the availability of safe and effective cART. Balancing the risks and benefits of this research poses unique challenges to potential study participants, clinicians and investigators.
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.