>Early treatment provides short-term benefits according to some research
>- http://www.aidsmeds.com/news/am20060919.html.
>So is the mantra "hit hard and hit early" back now ? Seems like they
>can't make up their mind about this.
I think the data are fairly clear. Up to 24 weeks, it seems to give a
bit of a bang for the buck that washes out after 48 weeks.
Suggesting that the idea of treating at or around seroconversion with
current ARV is probably NOT advisable. As a clinical plan or standard
of care, this would be simply risking more people developing side
effects or resistance earlier and possibly losing classes of drugs.
By contrast, I think the evidence is growing that, if possible, ARV
should be started around 300 CD4. A lot depends on other factors like
patient willingness and commitment, rate of CD4 decline, CD4
percentage, viral load, clinical condition, etc.
Meantime, EVERYONE with HIV can start with or continue to use a
multivitamin. This has been shown to reduce progression and/or
morbidity/mortality among those with AIDS. A multi is not only safe,
it enhances health. And a multi early in disease may then further
delay ARV debut.
George M. Carter
DavidT - 21 Sep 2006 16:07 GMT
I interpret the results a bit differently. In those with acute
infection, there does seem to be a sustained reduction in viral load
(or rather,, the VL did not reach a set point as high in these patients
as it did in those without therapy). Clinical benefits of this are
entirely conjectural, however, and comparison with MACS-type data is
speculative in my view.
We need to know more about othjer issues like resistance selection, as
George says.
> I think the data are fairly clear. Up to 24 weeks, it seems to give a
> bit of a bang for the buck that washes out after 48 weeks.
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>
> George M. Carter