Articles on Preexposure Prophylaxis; Article on HIV Vaccine Research
- "Promote HIV Chemoprophylaxis Research, Don't Prevent It," Science: Robert Grant of the University of California-San Francisco and colleagues write that using antiretroviral drugs as preexposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV infection "is a promising new approach," but clinical trials testing the method "have become controversial." The authors conclude that "a balance must be struck between the necessity to conduct trials to very high standards and the need to find ways to prevent the spread of HIV infection" (Grant et al., Science, 9/30).
- "The Abandoned Trials of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis for HIV: What Went Wrong?" PLoS Medicine: Jerome Singh of the University of KwaZulu-Natal in Durban, South Africa, and Edward Mills of University of Oxford in England examine how opposition to clinical trials of the oral antiretroviral drug tenofovir as a preexposure prophylaxis in high-risk populations could hamper the development of "promising, novel intervention" to HIV/AIDS. "Stakeholders must rise above ideological differences and keep their eye on the ultimate goal: combating AIDS," the authors say (Singh/Mills, PLoS Medicine, September 2005).
- "We Must Not Let Protesters Derail Trials of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis for HIV," PLoS Medicine: Joep Lange of the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands writes in response to Singh and Mills, saying that the authors "could have gone further in their criticism of the protestrrs who derailed the tenofovir trials and in their support for the trial investigators and sponsors." Lange continues, "Those who will suffer the most from the misguided ethical imperialism that derailed the PREP trials do not live in Paris, but as usual in Nairobi, Johannesburg, Phnom Penh and Calcutta" (Lange, PLoS Medicine, September 2005).
- "The end or the beginning of the drive to an HIV-preventative vaccine: a view from over 20 years," Lancet: Robert Gallo of the Institute of Human Virology in Baltimore outlines seven scientific obstacles that he says are preventing the development of an effective HIV vaccine. He concludes that "it is not time to give up on HIV vaccines but to change the way we pursue them" (Gallo, Lancet, 9/28).