ReviewThe lancet. HIV2024
Analytical treatment interruption in children living with HIV: position statement from the EPIICAL consortium.
Review in The lancet. HIV, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Selection of effective LRAs using a newly designedMicrobiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Article
- Intentions and attitudes of caregivers towards enrolment of their children and adolescents living with HIV into remission trials involving analytic treatment interruption.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2026Article
- Autovaccination revisited: potential to boost antiviral immunity and facilitate HIV-1 cure/remission in children.Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2025Review
- Immune signatures and biomarkers of viral control in early-treated children with HIV: insights informing intervention.Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2025Review
- Intact HIV DNA decays in children with and without complete viral load suppression.PLoS pathogens · 2025Article
- HIV reservoir and premature aging: risk factors for aging-associated illnesses in adolescents and young adults with perinatally acquired HIV.PLoS pathogens · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Analytical treatment interruption (ATI) is widely acknowledged as an essential component of studies to advance our understanding of HIV cure, but discussion has largely been focused on adults. To address this gap, we reviewed evidence related to the safety and utility of ATI in paediatric populations. Three randomised ATI trials using CD4 T-cell and clinical criteria to guide restart of antiretroviral therapy (ART) have been conducted. These trials found low risks associated with ATI in children, including reassuring findings pertaining to neurocognitive outcomes. Similar to adults treated during acute infection, infants treated early in life have shifts in virological and immunological parameters that increase their likelihood of achieving ART-free viral control. Early ART limits the size and diversity of the viral reservoir and shapes effective innate and HIV-specific humoral and cellular responses. Several cases of durable ART-free viral control in early treated children have been reported. We recommend that, where appropriate for the study question and where adequate monitoring is available, ATI should be integrated into ART-free viral control research in children living with HIV. Paediatric participants have the greatest likelihood of benefiting and potentially the most years to prospectively realise those benefits. Excluding children from ATI trials limits the evidence base and delays access to interventions.
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.