Clinical outcomes in clinical trials of anti-HIV treatment

J Reekie; A Mocroft; Neaton J; Jens Dilling Lundgren

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/17469600.1.3.251

Clinical outcomes in clinical trials of anti-HIV treatment

J Reekie, A Mocroft, Neaton J, Jens Dilling Lundgren

Abstract

Since the introduction of combination antiretroviral therapy, there has been a decrease in both AIDS-defining illnesses and deaths. This decrease meant that performing clinical trials with clinical outcomes in HIV infection became more time consuming and hence costly. Improved understanding and knowledge of HIV led to short-term trials using surrogate outcomes such as viral load and CD4 count. This established a faster drug approval process that complimented the rapid need to evaluate and provide access to drugs based on short-term trials. However, no treatment has yet been found that eradicates the infection, so when treatment is started it is currently a lifelong commitment. Is it reasonable then that guidelines are based almost completely on short-term randomized trials and observational studies of surrogate markers, or is there still a need for trials with clinical outcomes?

Original language	English
Journal	Future HIV Ther
Volume	1
Issue number	3
Pages (from-to)	251-8
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.2217/17469600.1.3.251
Publication status	Published - 2007

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/17469600.1.3.251

http://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/abs/10.2217/17469600.1.3.251

Cite this

@article{66d11e1656624f68ba7fdfc5b3fd17b0,

title = "Clinical outcomes in clinical trials of anti-HIV treatment",

abstract = "Since the introduction of combination antiretroviral therapy, there has been a decrease in both AIDS-defining illnesses and deaths. This decrease meant that performing clinical trials with clinical outcomes in HIV infection became more time consuming and hence costly. Improved understanding and knowledge of HIV led to short-term trials using surrogate outcomes such as viral load and CD4 count. This established a faster drug approval process that complimented the rapid need to evaluate and provide access to drugs based on short-term trials. However, no treatment has yet been found that eradicates the infection, so when treatment is started it is currently a lifelong commitment. Is it reasonable then that guidelines are based almost completely on short-term randomized trials and observational studies of surrogate markers, or is there still a need for trials with clinical outcomes?",

author = "J Reekie and A Mocroft and Neaton J and Lundgren, {Jens Dilling}",

year = "2007",

doi = "http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/17469600.1.3.251",

language = "English",

volume = "1",

pages = "251--8",

journal = "Future HIV Ther",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical outcomes in clinical trials of anti-HIV treatment

AU - Reekie, J

AU - Mocroft, A

AU - J, Neaton

AU - Lundgren, Jens Dilling

PY - 2007

Y1 - 2007

N2 - Since the introduction of combination antiretroviral therapy, there has been a decrease in both AIDS-defining illnesses and deaths. This decrease meant that performing clinical trials with clinical outcomes in HIV infection became more time consuming and hence costly. Improved understanding and knowledge of HIV led to short-term trials using surrogate outcomes such as viral load and CD4 count. This established a faster drug approval process that complimented the rapid need to evaluate and provide access to drugs based on short-term trials. However, no treatment has yet been found that eradicates the infection, so when treatment is started it is currently a lifelong commitment. Is it reasonable then that guidelines are based almost completely on short-term randomized trials and observational studies of surrogate markers, or is there still a need for trials with clinical outcomes?

AB - Since the introduction of combination antiretroviral therapy, there has been a decrease in both AIDS-defining illnesses and deaths. This decrease meant that performing clinical trials with clinical outcomes in HIV infection became more time consuming and hence costly. Improved understanding and knowledge of HIV led to short-term trials using surrogate outcomes such as viral load and CD4 count. This established a faster drug approval process that complimented the rapid need to evaluate and provide access to drugs based on short-term trials. However, no treatment has yet been found that eradicates the infection, so when treatment is started it is currently a lifelong commitment. Is it reasonable then that guidelines are based almost completely on short-term randomized trials and observational studies of surrogate markers, or is there still a need for trials with clinical outcomes?

U2 - http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/17469600.1.3.251

DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/17469600.1.3.251

M3 - Journal article

VL - 1

SP - 251

EP - 258

JO - Future HIV Ther

JF - Future HIV Ther

IS - 3

ER -

Clinical outcomes in clinical trials of anti-HIV treatment

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this