显示标签为“Sharply”的博文。显示所有博文
显示标签为“Sharply”的博文。显示所有博文

2011年5月14日星期六

Early H.I.V. Therapy Sharply Curbs Transmission

 

Patients with H.I.V. were 96 percent less likely to pass on the infection if they were taking antiretroviral drugs — a finding that is so overwhelming that it is likely to change the way American AIDS doctors treat patients and what treatment policies are adopted by the World Health Organization and other countries, said Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which paid for the trial.


The data was so convincing that the trial, scheduled to last until 2015, is effectively being ended early.


There have been previous studies, notably among drug abusers in San Francisco and Vancouver, British Columbia, that concluded that starting patients on drugs immediately would stop them from infecting others.


Those studies led Unaids, the United Nations AIDS-fighting agency, to adopt “test and treat” as its goal last year; the policy encourages doctors to start people on treatment as soon as they test positive for H.I.V. However, this is the first evidence from a randomized clinical trial, the gold standard in medical research.


AIDS prevention specialists not connected to the trial were enthusiastic.


“These results are phenomenal,” said Thomas J. Coates, director of the global health program at the University of California, Los Angeles, and the founder of the Center for AIDS Prevention Studies in San Francisco. “It was a tough study to do, and I’m thrilled it came out this way.”


Dr. Julio Montaner, an AIDS specialist at the University of British Columbia whose work among Vancouver heroin addicts helped lead to the Unaids policy, called the result of 96 percent protection “as good as it gets.”


“This is consistent with what we’ve been saying and doing in British Columbia for close to a decade,” he said. “How much more evidence do we need before we implement what we know works?”


The $73 million trial, known as HPTN 052, involved 1,763 couples in 13 cities on four continents. One member of each couple was infected with H.I.V.; the other was not. In half the couples, chosen at random, the infected partner was put on antiretroviral drugs as soon as he or she tested positive for the virus.


In the other half, the infected person started treatment only when his or her CD4 count — a measure of the immune system’s strength — dropped below 250 per cubic millimeter.


In 28 of the couples, the uninfected person became infected with the partner’s strain of the virus. Twenty-seven of those 28 infections took place in couples in which the partner who was infected first was not yet getting treatment.


On Thursday, Dr. Fauci and Dr. Myron Cohen, an AIDS specialist from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the study’s director, announced that the data collected since the study began in 2005 had been “unblinded” to an independent safety review panel, which is standard procedure in clinical trials. When the panel realized how much protection early treatment afforded, it recommended that drug regimens be offered to all participants. Although participants will still be followed, the trial is effectively over because it will no longer be a comparison between two groups on different regimens.


The results carry moral implications for doctors in the United States. Although medical associations like the Infectious Diseases Society of America advocate starting patients on AIDS drugs early, the decision is made by the doctor and patient. Some patients fear the reported side effects of AIDS drugs and want to delay taking the drugs until they get obviously sick or until their CD4 counts fall, and some doctors go along with that, Dr. Fauci said, especially as long as their patients’ CD4 counts remain above 350.


But that means the patient may infect others during the delay. Of the 27 people in the study who became infected while their partners were not yet taking the drugs, 17 had partners whose CD4 counts were still above 350.


Asked if it could now be considered immoral for a doctor to accede to a patient’s request to delay starting drugs, Dr. Fauci said: “I’m not going to go there. I’m not going to say it’s immoral. But there is more and more data showing the advantages of starting as early as you can.”


Dr. Coates of U.C.L.A. said he hoped that treatment delays would fade away because the newest antiretroviral drugs had few side effects.


Although the evidence suggests that it would be good public health policy to lower infection rates by starting everyone on drugs as soon as they are infected, that is impossible in much of the world. For lack of money, clinics in Africa are turning away patients who are not just infected but close to death. And in some American states where money provided by the Ryan White Care Act has run out, poor uninsured people are on waiting lists.


Although the trial was relatively large, there are some limitations on interpreting the data.


More than 90 percent of the couples in the trial, who lived in Botswana, Brazil, India, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa, Thailand, the United States and Zimbabwe, were heterosexual.


“We would have liked to have a substantial number of men as potential study subjects, but they just weren’t interested,” Dr. Cohen said.


Although common sense suggests the results would be similar in the contexts of homosexual sex and sex between people who are not couples, strictly speaking, the results apply only to the type of people studied, Dr. Fauci said.


 

2011年5月5日星期四

Asthma Rate Rises Sharply in U.S., Government Says

According to the report, from 2001 to 2009 the prevalence of asthma increased among all demographic groups studied, including men, women, whites, blacks and Hispanics. Black children are most acutely affected: the study found that 17 percent of black children — nearly one in five — had a diagnosis of asthma in 2009, up from 11.4 percent, or about one in nine, in 2001.


While officials at the Centers for Disease Control emphasized that asthma could be controlled if managed effectively, they were at a loss to explain why it had become more widespread even as important triggers like cigarette smoking had become less common.


“We don’t know exactly why the number is going up, but, importantly, we know there are measures individuals with asthma can take to control symptoms,” said Ileana Arias, principal deputy director of the centers.


Agency officials declined to comment on budgetary proposals that would reduce money for the National Asthma Control Program.


Prevention depends on educating patients about appropriate use of medications and ensuring that each patient has a written medical plan to control asthma, but the report found that only one-third of patients had been given a plan and only about half had been advised to make changes to eliminate asthma triggers at home, school and work.


Paul Garbe, chief of the Air Pollution and Respiratory Health Branch at the centers, noted the success of several state public health initiatives, including one in Connecticut in which asthma educators and environmental assessors were sent into homes to advise patients on what changes needed to be made and how to manage the disease.


The report found that the overall prevalence of asthma increased to 8.2 percent in 2009, when 24.6 million cases were diagnosed, from 7.3 percent in 2001, when 20.1 million cases were diagnosed — a 12.3 percent increase. Among the most affected were children, 9.6 percent of whom had asthma, and especially poor children, of whom 13.5 percent had it.


While 7.7 percent of adults were found to have asthma, the rate was higher among women (9.7 percent) and among poor adults of both sexes (10.6 percent).


Asthma costs grew to about $56 billion in 2007, up from about $53 billion in 2002, the report said, though annual deaths attributed to asthma declined to about 3,500 in 2007, from a peak of about 5,500 deaths in 1996.


Researchers are investigating several potential causes for the increase in asthma, including exposure to various allergens, traffic exhaust fumes, pesticides and certain plastics, as well as factors like obesity and diet that may play a role, said Dr. Rachel L. Miller, director of the asthma project at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University.


“There’s no easy singular explanation,” Dr. Miller said. “The more we study this, the more it raises a lot of questions. It’s not a straightforward puzzle at all.”


 

Asthma Rate Rises Sharply in U.S., Government Says

According to the report, from 2001 to 2009 the prevalence of asthma increased among all demographic groups studied, including men, women, whites, blacks and Hispanics. Black children are most acutely affected: the study found that 17 percent of black children — nearly one in five — had a diagnosis of asthma in 2009, up from 11.4 percent, or about one in nine, in 2001.


While officials at the Centers for Disease Control emphasized that asthma could be controlled if managed effectively, they were at a loss to explain why it had become more widespread even as important triggers like cigarette smoking had become less common.


“We don’t know exactly why the number is going up, but, importantly, we know there are measures individuals with asthma can take to control symptoms,” said Ileana Arias, principal deputy director of the centers.


Agency officials declined to comment on budgetary proposals that would reduce money for the National Asthma Control Program.


Prevention depends on educating patients about appropriate use of medications and ensuring that each patient has a written medical plan to control asthma, but the report found that only one-third of patients had been given a plan and only about half had been advised to make changes to eliminate asthma triggers at home, school and work.


Paul Garbe, chief of the Air Pollution and Respiratory Health Branch at the centers, noted the success of several state public health initiatives, including one in Connecticut in which asthma educators and environmental assessors were sent into homes to advise patients on what changes needed to be made and how to manage the disease.


The report found that the overall prevalence of asthma increased to 8.2 percent in 2009, when 24.6 million cases were diagnosed, from 7.3 percent in 2001, when 20.1 million cases were diagnosed — a 12.3 percent increase. Among the most affected were children, 9.6 percent of whom had asthma, and especially poor children, of whom 13.5 percent had it.


While 7.7 percent of adults were found to have asthma, the rate was higher among women (9.7 percent) and among poor adults of both sexes (10.6 percent).


Asthma costs grew to about $56 billion in 2007, up from about $53 billion in 2002, the report said, though annual deaths attributed to asthma declined to about 3,500 in 2007, from a peak of about 5,500 deaths in 1996.


Researchers are investigating several potential causes for the increase in asthma, including exposure to various allergens, traffic exhaust fumes, pesticides and certain plastics, as well as factors like obesity and diet that may play a role, said Dr. Rachel L. Miller, director of the asthma project at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University.


“There’s no easy singular explanation,” Dr. Miller said. “The more we study this, the more it raises a lot of questions. It’s not a straightforward puzzle at all.”