iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

AIDS Prevention: Pill Helps Gay Men Avoid HIV Infection, Study Finds

MARILYNN MARCHIONE   11/23/10 09:31 PM ET EST  AP

In the nearly 30 years the AIDS epidemic has raged, there has never been a more hopeful day than this. Three striking developments took place Tuesday: U.N. officials said new HIV cases are dropping dramatically worldwide. A study showed that a daily pill already on pharmacy shelves could help prevent new infections in gay men. And the pope opened the way for the use of condoms to prevent AIDS.

"I don't know of a day where so many pieces are beginning to align for HIV prevention and treatment, and frankly with a view to ending the epidemic," said Mitchell Warren, head of the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, a nonprofit group that works on HIV prevention research. "This is an incredibly opportune moment and we have to be sure we seize it."

President Barack Obama said the groundbreaking research on the AIDS drug "could mark the beginning of a new era in HIV prevention."

The U.N. report said that new cases dropped nearly 20 percent over the last decade and that 33.3 million people are living with HIV now.

"We can say with confidence and conviction that we have broken the trajectory of the AIDS pandemic," said UNAIDS Executive Director Michel Sidibe in Geneva.

Health officials credit part of the decline to wider condom use, and on Tuesday, in a historic shift in church teachings, the Vatican said that using a condom is a lesser evil than infecting a sexual partner with HIV.

Condoms remain the best weapon against AIDS, and the new prevention pill is not the chemical equivalent. But scientists called it a true breakthrough. The pill, Gilead Science's Truvada, is already used to treat people with HIV. A three-year global study found that daily doses cut the risk of infection in healthy gay and bisexual men when given with condoms, counseling and other prevention services.

The drug lowered the chances of infection by 44 percent, and by 73 percent or more among men who took their pills most faithfully. Researchers had feared the pills might give a false sense of security and make men less likely to use condoms or to limit their partners, but the opposite happened – risky sex declined.

The results are "a major advance" that can help curb the epidemic in gay men, said Dr. Kevin Fenton, AIDS prevention chief at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But he warned they may not apply to people exposed to HIV through male-female sex, drug use or other ways. Studies in those groups are under way.

Because Truvada is already on the market, the CDC is rushing to develop guidelines for doctors who want to use it to prevent HIV, and urged people to wait until those are ready.

As a practical matter, price could limit use. The pills cost $5,000 to $14,000 a year in the United States, but roughly $140 a year in some poor countries where they are sold in generic form.

Whether insurers or government health programs should pay for them is one of the tough issues to be sorted out, said Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

"This is an exciting finding," but it "is only one study in one specific study population," so its impact on others is unknown, Fauci said.

His institute sponsored the study with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The findings were published online by the New England Journal of Medicine.

It is the third AIDS prevention victory in about a year. In September 2009, scientists announced that a vaccine they are now trying to improve protected 1 in 3 people from getting HIV in a study in Thailand. In July, research in South Africa showed that a vaginal gel spiked with an AIDS drug could cut nearly in half a woman's chances of getting HIV from an infected partner.

Gay and bisexual men account for nearly half of the more than 1 million Americans living with HIV. Worldwide, more than 7,000 new infections occur each day. Only 5 to 10 percent of global cases involve sex between men.

"The condom is still the first line of defense," because it also prevents other sexually spread diseases and unwanted pregnancies, said the study leader, Dr. Robert M. Grant of the Gladstone Institutes, a private foundation affiliated with the University of California, San Francisco. But many men don't or won't use condoms all the time, so researchers have been testing other prevention tools.

AIDS drugs already are used to prevent infection in health care workers accidentally exposed to HIV, and in babies born to infected mothers. Taking these drugs before exposure to the virus may keep it from taking hold, just as taking malaria pills in advance can prevent that disease when someone is bitten by an infected mosquito.

The strategy showed great promise in monkey studies using tenofovir (brand name Viread) and emtricitabine, or FTC (Emtriva), sold in combination as Truvada by California-based Gilead Sciences Inc.

The company donated Truvada for the study, which involved about 2,500 men at high risk of HIV infection in Peru, Ecuador, Brazil, South Africa, Thailand and the United States (San Francisco and Boston). The foreign sites were chosen because of high rates of HIV infection and diverse populations.

More than 40 percent of participants had taken money for sex at least once. At the start of the study, they had 18 partners on average; that dropped to around six by the end.

The men were given either Truvada or dummy pills. All had monthly visits to get HIV testing, more pills and counseling. Every six months, they were tested for other sexually spread diseases and treated as needed.

After a median follow-up of just over a year, there were 64 HIV infections among the 1,248 men on dummy pills, and only 36 among the 1,251 on Truvada.

Among men who took their pills at least half the time, the risk of infection fell by 50 percent. For those who took pills on 90 percent or more days, risk fell 73 percent. Tests of drug levels in the blood confirmed that more consistent pill-taking gave better protection, and in one subgroup, the reduction in risk was 92 percent.

The treatment was safe. Side effects were similar in both groups except for nausea in the Truvada patients. Weight loss also was more common in the drug group, but it occurred in very few. Further study is needed on possible long-term risks.

All participants will get a chance to take Truvada in an 18-month extension of the study to see if men will take the pill more consistently if they know it helps, and whether that provides better protection. About 20,000 people are enrolled in other studies testing Truvada or its component drugs around the world.

The government will review all ongoing prevention studies, such as those of vaccines or anti-AIDS gels, and consider whether people getting dummy medicines should now get Truvada since it has been shown effective in gay men.

Gilead may seek approval to market Truvada for prevention, said Dr. Howard Jaffe, president of the company's philanthropic arm. Doctors can prescribe it for this purpose now if patients are willing to pay for it, and some already do.

Some people have speculated that could expose Gilead to new liability concerns, if someone took the pill and then sued if it did not prevent infection.

"The potential for having an intervention like this that has never been broadly available before raises new questions. It is something we would have to discuss internally and externally," Jaffe said.

Until the CDC's detailed advice on Truvada is available, the agency said gay and bisexual men should use condoms consistently and correctly, get tested and treated for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, get counseling and reduce their number of sexual partners.

___

Online:

CDC advice: http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom

AIDS information: http://www.aidsinfo.nih.gov

and http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/topics/HIVAIDS/

Pill study: http://www.iprexnews.com

Journal: http://www.nejm.org

UNAIDS: http://tinyurl.com/krq7kr

Prevention efforts: http://www.avac.org

FOLLOW HUFFPOST HEALTH

Filed by Meghan Neal  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 341
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Robert Weller
Retired AP Foreign Correspondent
08:21 AM on 11/24/2010
There is NO generic version of Truvada. It will be at least 2017 before there is. The company has been making some pills available for studies.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JayZee
Biofilm Slayer
08:13 AM on 11/24/2010
The fake HIV gravy train just keeps on rollin...
photo
cable1977
Against logic there is no armor like ignorance
09:04 AM on 11/24/2010
Oh good...an AIDS denialist.
07:57 AM on 11/24/2010
Has anyone listened to the guy who got the nobel prize for his pioneering research with HIV and Aids? Luc Montagnier now states that HIV is harmless, as I haven't spent decades researching the subject as the man himself has, I'd say - the whole thing was a whole lot of money making b****cks. And now a new pill hehehe - dollar signs everywhere. Go to youtube and put in Luc Montagnier and the movie title 'house of numbers'. Your eyes will drop out and your brain will explode.
photo
cable1977
Against logic there is no armor like ignorance
09:14 AM on 11/24/2010
Nice argument from authority. What he states isn't as important as whether or not he has the research to back up such a claim. The reality is that Montagnier has no evidence that HIV is harmless. The other researcher who won the Nobel Prize, Françoise Barré-Sinoussi, obviously doesn't agree or else she wouldn't be wasting her time continuing to publish papers on AIDS treatment. So there's one Nobel Prize winner who thinks HIV is harmless and another one who disagrees, so I guess we'll just have to let the data decide, huh?

House of Numbers is AIDS denialist propaganda.

So then why don't you volunteer to be injected with HIV? Then we can wait a while and see if it's actually harmless.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dyson
debunking pseudoscience, one fallacy at a time.
04:38 AM on 11/24/2010
Another major concern I have is regarding viral resistance.

The trial showed that Truvada halved the rate of infection in those who took it.
But it didn't prevent all infections, so as a result of this study there are men with HIV who acquired HIV while on Truvada and while still taking Truvada, which can only foster selection of resistance against the drugs involved (note there are only 2 drugs in Truvada, and the use of 2 drugs [nucleoside analogues] invariably leads to resistance).

So if this strategy is now deployed widely, the effectiveness of the drug can only drop, as resistant strains become more prevalent in the population. And those with HIV will start off their infections with viruses that are resistance to emtricitabine and tenofovir, restricting their own future therapy options.
photo
cable1977
Against logic there is no armor like ignorance
09:20 AM on 11/24/2010
Well, I would hypothesize it depends on the compliance with the drug regimen. People who are less compliant would be more likely to be infected. Same with resistance. People who are less compliant are more likely to leave a window for the development of drug resistance, but there's really no data to argue that the reason that those on Truvada were infected was because of resistance.

All of these drugs drive resistance development eventually, but one also would have to factor in the potential for reducing the number of infections as well into the risk/benefit equation. I agree it is a concern though, but certainly not a strong enough concern to prevent further research. It would seem that such prophylactic treatment is a long way from being implemented for a variety of reasons.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
janiepants
03:14 AM on 11/24/2010
Ca-ching! Like Chris Rock said-there's no money in a cure. The money is in treatment. A pill that you will have to take daily for the rest of your sexually active life. Brilliant.
04:02 AM on 11/24/2010
As a practical matter, price could limit use. The pills cost $5,000 to $14,000 a year in the United States, but roughly $140 a year in some poor countries where they are sold in generic form.

Yeah, this is exactly what is wrong with the for profit health care in this country.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Robert Weller
Retired AP Foreign Correspondent
05:19 PM on 11/24/2010
This is not true. There is no generic version. In any case, even if it did cost $16,000 a year that would be a pittance compared with the cost of one AIDS case. Not to mention the suffering.
02:54 AM on 11/24/2010
There is joyous celebration among the bareback crowd at bath houses all across San Fran!
03:02 AM on 11/24/2010
***There is joyous celebration among the bareback crowd at bath houses all across San Fran!***

You're familiar with them then?
03:12 AM on 11/24/2010
***I pity their casual attitude toward swapping bodily fluids and calling it a lifestyle when it is a scientifically documented harmful and disease prone activity***

I've got news for ya pal, penises and vaginas also swap bodily fluids.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Turtlenews
03:56 AM on 11/24/2010
There are no Bathhouses in San Francisco
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cleo Creech
Atlanta writer, poet, activist.
02:29 AM on 11/24/2010
Here's my concern, already pharma companies are ending HIV drug studies based on a drugs maybe not proving economically viable. If this is successful and the pharmas have this massive new audience for preventive drugs, as well as the people on maintenance drugs, then if infection rates do go down - why would a pharma company ever want to even consider developing any new drugs or heaven's forbid - a cure of vaccine. This just seems a huge recipe for disaster, having a huge chunk of population reliant on ultra-expensive drugs that they have to take every day - and a pharma industry that if anything has an incentive for NOT curing a diesease, and a government that's really not pushing for one either. It's almost like a bad sci-fi movie, where you have a permanent underclass scraping for life-saving drugs to feed a bloated pharma cash machine.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
InspiredByTruth
02:58 AM on 11/24/2010
Anything that prevents the spread is a good thing. Doesn't make sense to shelve it out of hope of a vaccine that could be years away.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
HC4BO
Far-Left Socialist
01:06 AM on 11/24/2010
... well I guess the pill helps UNTIL they find out the side effects ...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:57 AM on 11/24/2010
Having taken it daily for years, I'd be happy to tell you all about it. Unfortunately, the content filter here won't permit the necessary vocabulary, and my mother taught me long ago that euphemisms like "number two" were for idiots.

But in general with HIV meds, you won't go to far wrong imagining a ballon filled with stewed prunes being kneaded violently by a sumo wrestler. Of course the details differ, but the end result is much the same.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:52 AM on 11/24/2010
I was infected with HIV sometime between 1977 and 1982, have been fighting AIDS since 1987, and so a couple of years ago added Truvada to the tens of thousands of other pills I've taken.

It costs about $14,000/year, retail. Because it's a "non-preferred" medication not on my health insurer's list of most profitable items, I pay 40% of that. (My insurance is pathetic, health care options for disabled terminally ill people beingsomewhat limited in America. I take three equally expensive "non-preferred" medications because the cheaper alternatives cause my GI tract to become a snake-handling christianist writhing on the floor shrieking nonsense syllables about Jeezus. My insurer considers this an extravagance - no doubt they have similar notions about my continued existence.

Who but those few gay men who happen to be among the 1% of Americans who own the rest of us will have access to this wonder drug? Our country's health care system won't pay for condoms - a preventative so cheap as to be virtually free. It won't pay for women's contraception, or termination of unwanted pregnancy, or vision care, or a great many other aspects of health.

It strikes me as unlikely that health insurers will pay millions to prevent gay men from acquiring a disease when it's so much cheaper to simply cancel their insurance should they do so.

So who gets the drug? Who will be safe, and who will go on playing Russian roulette every time he has sex?
02:56 AM on 11/24/2010
"go on playing Russian roulette every time he has sex?"

Use a condomn.
I never have to worry about Russion roulette, since my wife and I are monogomous.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:35 AM on 11/24/2010
Yes dear. We're very clear that righteously conforming monogamous American heterosexuals have never much been at much risk of contracting HIV, but thanks for reminding us just the same.

Feel better? Now go back to your no doubt equally smug wife and let the rest of us continue figuring out how best to survive this without becoming just like you: perfect and heartless.

After all there are fates worse than death. Thanks for reminding me.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Turtlenews
04:00 AM on 11/24/2010
How do you know she is
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Turtlenews
04:02 AM on 11/24/2010
Is it possible to fly to another country in order to purchase the Meds??
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:15 PM on 11/24/2010
Many things are possible. But are they legal?

Given that the W regime allowed big pharma to write health care legislation and President Expediency has continued the trend in assorted back room deals with a variety of blood-filled corporate ticks, the answer is "no."
12:51 AM on 11/24/2010
According to NPR report, each pill costs $36.
12:32 AM on 11/24/2010
It costs my state $28,000 to pay for my prescriptions.
It costs the taxpayers another $29,000 for disability.
I have free health care provided to me, by a fine doctor in a state of the art facility.
I also receive $5,000 in direct and indirect aid to keep a roof over my head and food in the fridge.
 
Wouldn't it be cheaper to keep people from getting infected?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dyson
debunking pseudoscience, one fallacy at a time.
06:24 AM on 11/24/2010
Well the drug still works poorly as an HIV prophylaxis as described in this study.

Stick to condoms or abstinence - far cheaper still, no side effects, no selection for HIV resistance.
12:16 AM on 11/24/2010
"...could help prevent new infections in gay men". Wait it only works for gay men?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
zlohcuc
"Serving millions from atop the Allegheny"
12:46 AM on 11/24/2010
Don't worry. il Papa has your back on this issue...he said so just today...every thing should be dandy now that he is ok with the condom thing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
InspiredByTruth
03:00 AM on 11/24/2010
This study was for gay men, they're doing one for women now but other studies have showed similar success for them too..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Soulmentor
"To thine own self be true...."
03:14 AM on 11/24/2010
Well, why single out gay men anyway. If it works for gay men it works for MEN, period, which should be helpful in Africa where AIDS is primarily a "hetero disease". Get that everyone? In Africa and many other parts of the world AIDS is primarily a disease seen among heterosexuals. And for you American religious (self)righteous anti-gay bigots, get it in your head that AIDS isn't a "gay disease" here either. That bug is an equal-gender opportunist. And you know that's true no matter how you want to play with it politically.
11:32 PM on 11/23/2010
Someone should import the 39 cents generics and sell them for $39 here. That's 100x profit and still much cheaper than the $5k-$14K here.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:47 AM on 11/24/2010
We have very serious laws against that. Various huge pharmaceutical companies wrote them, they were passed into law without serious argument during the W regime, and our current Overlord allowed it all to continue unobstructed in a back room deal to get our current ludicrous health care plan passed.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Texan POd
11:30 PM on 11/23/2010
I'm sure the gay community has been waiting on the OK from the Pope to start using condoms...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MeRainyday
Green Progressive for Equality
11:25 PM on 11/23/2010
Per knowledgable young men. There are better pills for possible prevention that don't cause disfiguring lipodystrophy. This would have to be taken every day of your life. Add up the cost. This is just a BIG PHARMA ad!! Nothing new at all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JayZee
Biofilm Slayer
08:11 AM on 11/24/2010
What are the better pills?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Robert Weller
Retired AP Foreign Correspondent
05:28 PM on 11/24/2010
A quick search indicates Truvada has not been confirmed to be linked to lipodystrophy. However, thanks for bringing up the subject.