Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / September 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Is "Hit hard hit early" back ?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
liukane@hotmail.com - 20 Sep 2006 22:08 GMT
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.
GMCarter - 21 Sep 2006 12:38 GMT
>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

Rate this thread:






 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.