Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29021399›Full record

ArticleJournal of virology2017

Modeling of Antilatency Treatment in HIV: What Is the Optimal Duration of Antiretroviral Therapy-Free HIV Remission?

Deborah Cromer, Mykola Pinkevych, Thomas A Rasmussen, Sharon R Lewin, Stephen J Kent, Miles P Davenport

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of virology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Modeling HIV persistence and cure studies.Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Deborah CromerKirby Institute for Infection and Immunity, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Australia, Sydney, Australia.
Mykola PinkevychKirby Institute for Infection and Immunity, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Australia, Sydney, Australia.
Thomas A RasmussenDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Sharon R LewinThe Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, The University of Melbourne and Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Stephen J KentThe Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, The University of Melbourne and Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Miles P DavenportKirby Institute for Infection and Immunity, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Australia, Sydney, Australia m.davenport@unsw.edu.au.
UNSW Sydney · AUMonash University · AUThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

Delaney AIDS Research Enterprise to Cure HIVUM1AI126611 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI DEEKS, STEVEN GRANT, PICKER, LOUIS J. · 2016 to 2020
$27.9M
NIAID NIH HHS UM1 AI126611
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A number of treatment strategies are currently being developed to promote antiretroviral therapy-free HIV cure or remission. While complete elimination of the HIV reservoir would prevent recurrence of infection, it is not clear how different remission lengths would affect viral rebound and transmission. In this work, we use a stochastic model to show that a treatment that achieves a 1-year average time to viral remission will still lead to nearly a quarter of subjects experiencing viral rebound within the first 3 months. Given quarterly viral testing intervals, this leads to an expected 39 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 22 to 69) heterosexual transmissions and up to 262 (95% UI, 107 to 534) homosexual transmissions per 1,000 treated subjects over a 10-year period. Thus, a balance between high initial treatment levels, risk of recrudescence, and risk of transmission should be considered when assessing the "useful" or optimal length of antiretroviral therapy-free HIV remission to be targeted. We also investigate the trade-off between increasing the average duration of remission versus the risk of treatment failure (viral recrudescence) and the need for retreatment. To minimize drug exposure, we found that the optimal target of antilatency interventions is a 1,700-fold reduction in the size of the reservoir, which leads to an average time to recrudescence of 30 years. Interestingly, this is a significantly lower level of reduction than that required for complete elimination of the viral reservoir. Additionally, we show that when shorter periods are targeted, there is a real probability of viral transmission occurring between tests for viral rebound.

Indexed as

Anti-HIV AgentsHIV-1HIV InfectionsHumansModels, StatisticalStochastic ProcessesTime FactorsTreatment FailureViral LoadVirus ActivationVirus LatencyAnti-HIV AgentsHIVlatencyreactivationremission

Identifiers

PMID29021399
PMCPMC5709587
OpenAlexW2761727196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.