Antiretroviral Therapy: Time To Think Strategically
Authors: Oren J. Cohen
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (2000)

Editorials15 February 2000Antiretroviral Therapy: Time To Think StrategicallyFREEOren J. Cohen, MDOren J. Cohen, MDNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Bethesda, MD 20892-2520 (Cohen)Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-132-4-200002150-00011 SectionsAboutVisual AbstractPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), the use of combinations of antiretroviral drugs that can profoundly suppress HIV replication for prolonged periods, has substantially decreased AIDS-related morbidity and mortality in the United States and western Europe (1). However, the optimal use of antiretroviral drugs remains a rapidly evolving field and numerous obstacles need to be addressed. Many HAART regimens are associated with substantial toxicity, large pill burdens, and high cost. In addition, it has become clear that currently available HAART regimens cannot completely suppress HIV replication (2).Guidelines for the optimal use of antiretroviral therapy have been issued by several panels of experts (3). Recommendations on the best time to initiate antiretroviral therapy are based on studies of the relation between surrogate markers of HIV disease progression and risk for clinical progression to AIDS (4). On the basis of these data, antiretroviral therapy is usually recommended for asymptomatic patients with CD4+ counts less than 500 cells/mm3 or plasma viral levels less than 10 000 HIV RNA copies/mL. Decisions about which antiretroviral agents to use in these circumstances and when to switch therapy are guided by published data and expert opinion. To keep pace with rapidly evolving concepts, the guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation (3) are updated frequently on the World Wide Web (www.hivatis.org).In this issue, Henry (5) argues for a more conservative, individualized approach to antiretroviral therapy and challenges some of the foundations on which guidelines have been based. An important point of Henry's article is that the goals of antiretroviral therapy must extend beyond simply suppressing plasma viremia as much as possible for as long as possible. In fact, the DHHS/Kaiser Foundation guidelines are being revised to emphasize this point. Additional goals of therapy include reduction in HIV-related morbidity and mortality; restoration and preservation of immune function; minimization of toxicity, disruption of lifestyle, and the frequency with which drug-resistant virus strains emerge; and preservation of future treatment options.Cogent arguments can be made for both early and delayed therapy in HIV-infected persons. The rapid dynamics of viral replication (6, 7), the recognition that high levels of viral replication occur in lymphoid tissue at all stages of disease (8), and the early appearance of immune system dysfunction support early therapy. Recent data, however, suggest that at least some degree of immune reconstitution occurs after initiation of HAART, even in patients with late-stage disease (9, 10). Restoration of in vitro responses to antigens associated with opportunistic infections (for example, cytomegalovirus) are frequently restored during HAART (11); most important, it may be safe to discontinue primary prophylaxis against Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and maintenance therapy for cytomegalovirus retinitis in the setting of increasing CD4+ T-cell counts (12, 13). In addition, HAART may be able to partially reverse some HIV-induced disruptions of lymphoid tissue architecture (14).The encouraging data on immune reconstitution during HAART support initiation of antiretroviral therapy at a later stage of disease than is currently recommended. Later initiation of therapy may also spare associated toxicity and cost. However, clinicians and patients opting for this approach should consider several concerns. First, there is probably a threshold for loss of CD4+ T cells and thymic function beyond which immune reconstitution is severely impaired (15). Furthermore, reconstitution of HIV-specific CD4+ T-cell responses may be possible only when HAART is initiated in the very early stages of HIV infection (16), although the clinical significance of this observation remains uncertain.Another caveat regarding delayed initiation of antiretroviral therapy concerns the goal of minimizing the emergence of drug-resistant strains of HIV. Henry argues that the only guarantee against drug resistance is delaying therapy and thereby avoiding exposure to the selective pressure of the antiretroviral agents. Such a strategy, however, would result in far more viral replication cycles than early, successful HAART. Because of the stochastic nature of mutations in the HIV genome, the greater number of replication cycles that occur in the setting of delayed therapy could serve to increase the frequency of preexisting resistance mutations and shorten the time to treatment failure after therapy is initiated (17). This scenario may explain the observation that high baseline viral levels and low baseline CD4+ T-cell counts are independent predictors of failure during HAART (18). In fact, Richman and colleagues (19) demonstrated in 1990 that viral isolates taken from patients with fewer signs and symptoms or high CD4+ T-lymphocyte counts developed reduced susceptibility to zidovudine at slower rates than isolates taken from patients with AIDS or AIDS-related complex. It is reasonable to assume that the persistent, low-level HIV replication that occurs during HAART (2) would lead to the emergence of drug resistance; however, such replication seems to occur often even in the absence of detectable drug-resistant mutations (2).The optimal time to initiate antiretroviral therapy and the optimal regimen to use are determined by myriad factors and may vary considerably among individual persons. The DHHS/Kaiser Foundation guidelines can provide useful suggestions to facilitate these decisions (3); however, these same guidelines clearly state that patients and physicians must jointly make such decisions after carefully weighing the risks and benefits as well as the patient's readiness to commit to a complex medical regimen (3). Indeed, a discussion of therapeutically aggressive and conservative approaches is included in the guidelines (3).Henry advocates a long-term strategic approach to antiretroviral therapy. This is undoubtedly where the field must go. Although most of the 14 antiretroviral agents have become available only within the past 3 years, encouraging developments have already been seen in strategic approaches to antiretroviral therapy. The request for applications for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases' Adult Therapeutic Clinical Trials Program for AIDS (AI-98-013; www.niaid.nih.gov/daids/adulttrialsrfa.htm) calls for study designs that evaluate strategic approaches to antiretroviral therapy, including when to initiate therapy, which agents to use, when to switch therapy, and how to maximize immune reconstitution. Studies that evaluate long-term outcomes of antiretroviral therapy are also called for, and studies that address many strategic issues in antiretroviral therapy are already in progress (Table).Table. Strategic Approaches to Antiretroviral Therapy Today's studies help formulate tomorrow's guidelines. The rapid expansion of the antiretroviral armamentarium over the past few years is a welcome change for HIV-infected persons. However, many studies must be conducted over an extended period to determine the best ways to use the wide range of available antiretroviral regimens.References1. Palella FJ, Delaney KM, Moorman AC, Loveless MO, Fuhrer J, Satten GA, et al . Declining morbidity and mortality among patients with advanced human immunodeficiency virus infection. HIV Outpatient Study Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:853-60. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2. D'Aquila R, Walker B. Exploring the benefits and limits of highly active antiretroviral therapy [Editorial]. JAMA. 1999;282:1668-9. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Department of Health and Human Services and the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-infected adults and adolescents. Ann Intern Med. 1998;128:1079-100. LinkGoogle Scholar4. Mellors JW, Munoz A, Giorgi JV, Margolick JB, Tassoni CJ, Gupta P, et al . Plasma viral load and CD4+ lymphocytes as prognostic markers of HIV-1 infection. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:946-54. LinkGoogle Scholar5. Henry K. The case for more cautious, patient-focused antiretroviral therapy. Ann Intern Med. 1999;132:306-11. LinkGoogle Scholar6. Ho DD, Neumann AU, Perelson AS, Chen W, Leonard JM, Markowitz M. Rapid turnover of plasma virions and CD4 lymphocytes in HIV-1 infection. Nature. 1995;373:123-6. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Wei X, Ghosh SK, Taylor ME, Johnson VA, Emini EA, Deutsch P, et al . Viral dynamics in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection. Nature. 1995;373:117-22. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Pantaleo G, Graziosi C, Demarest JF, Butini L, Montroni M, Fox CH, et al . HIV infection is active and progressive in lymphoid tissue during the clinically latent stage of disease. Nature. 1993;362:355-8. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar9. Autran B, Carcelain G, Li TS, Blanc C, Mathez D, Tubiana R, et al . Positive effects of combined antiretroviral therapy on CD4+ T cell homeostasis and function in advanced HIV disease. Science. 1997;277:112-6. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10. Douek DC, McFarland RD, Keiser PH, Gage EA, Massey JM, Haynes BF, et al . Changes in thymic function with age and during the treatment of HIV infection. Nature. 1998;396:690-5. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar11. Komanduri KV, Viswanathan MN, Wieder ED, Schmidt DK, Bredt BM, Jacobsen MA, et al . Restoration of cytomegalovirus-specific CD4+ T-lymphocyte responses after ganciclovir and highly active antiretroviral therapy in individuals infected with HIV-1. Nat Med. 1998;4:953-6. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar12. Masur H, Kaplan J. Does Pneumocystis carinii prophylaxis still need to be lifelong? [Editorial]. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:1356-8. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar13. Whitcup SM, Fortin E, Lindblad AS, Griffiths P, Metcalf JA, Robinson MR, et al . Discontinuation of anticytomegalovirus therapy in patients with HIV infection and cytomegalovirus retinitis. JAMA. 1999;282:1633-7. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar14. Zhang ZQ, Schuler T, Cavert W, Notermans DW, Gebhard K, Henry K, et al . Reversibility of the pathological changes in the follicular dendritic cell network with treatment of HIV-1 infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96:5169-72. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar15. Hengel RL, Jones BM, Kennedy MS, Hubbard MR, McDougal JS. Lymphocyte kinetics and precursor frequency-dependent recovery of CD4(+)CD45RA(+)CD62L(+) naive T cells following triple-drug therapy for HIV type 1 infection. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 1999;15:435-43. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar16. Rosenberg ES, Billingsley JM, Caliendo AM, Boswell SL, Sax PE, Kalams SA, et al . Vigorous HIV-1-specific CD4+ T cell responses associated with control of viremia. Science. 1997;278:1447-50. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar17. Coffin JM. HIV population dynamics in vivo: implications for genetic variation, pathogenesis, and therapy. Science. 1995;267:483-9. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar18. Ledergerber B, Egger M, Opravil M, Telenti A, Hirschel B, Battegay M, et al . Clinical progression and virological failure on highly active antiretroviral therapy in HIV-1 patients: a prospective cohort study. Swiss HIV Cohort Study. Lancet. 1999;353:863-8. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar19. Richman DD, Grimes JM, Lagakos SW. Effect of stage of disease and drug dose on zidovudine susceptibilities of isolates of human immunodeficiency virus. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 1990;3:743-6. MedlineGoogle Scholar Comments0 CommentsSign In to Submit A Comment Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Bethesda, MD 20892-2520 (Cohen)Note: Dr. Cohen is Executive Secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)/Kaiser Family Foundation Panel on Clinical Practices for the Treatment of HIV Infection. The opinions in this article are those of the author and are not official policy positions of the U.S. government or the DHHS/Kaiser Foundation panel.Acknowledgments: The author thanks Drs. Anthony Fauci, John Mellors, and Michael Polis for helpful discussion.Corresponding Author: Oren J. Cohen, MD, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 31 Center Drive MSC 2520, Building 31, Room 7A05, Bethesda, MD 20892. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoThe Case for More Cautious, Patient-Focused Antiretroviral Therapy Keith Henry Metrics Cited ByTreatment of HIV infection in childrenResponse to highly active antiretroviral therapy varies with ageShort-Term CD4 Cell Response After Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Initiated at Different Times From Seroconversion in 1500 SeroconvertersComparison of initial combination antiretroviral therapy with a single protease inhibitor, ritonavir and saquinavir, or efavirenzTiming of antiretroviral therapy. Use of Markov modeling and decision analysis to evaluate the long-term implications of therapyEditorial: Reconsidering Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV: Lessons from San Francisco 15 February 2000Volume 132, Issue 4Page: 320-322KeywordsAIDSAntiretroviral therapyAntiretroviralsDrug therapyDrugsHIVMortalityMutationToxicityViral replication Issue Published: 15 February 2000 PDF DownloadLoading ...