Posts Tagged ‘tenofovir’

Physician-scientists working on the frontlines of the HIV/AIDS epidemic today urged the White House to set bold new HIV treatment targets for PEPFAR, the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.

The Center for Global Health Policy joined with a coalition of other organizations—including HealthGAP, amfAR (the Foundation for AIDS Research), the Treatment Action Group, and The AIDS Institute—in calling for PEPFAR to reach 6 million people with antiretroviral drugs by 2013 and 7 million by 2014.

The Global Center and these other organizations, part of the Global AIDS Roundtable Treatment Working Group, detailed this HIV treatment imperative in a recent memo to US Global AIDS Coordinator Eric Goosby, MD.

The memo comes as the Administration crafts two related policy positions. First, the Administration is now preparing its Congressionally-mandated five-year global AIDS strategy, including treatment goals and funding levels for fiscal year 2011. And second, in the coming months, the White House is expected to release the details of its Global Health Initiative, which some fear will outline a shift away from AIDS toward other global health priorities.

HIV/AIDS experts say new attention to child and maternal health is welcome and necessary, but it cannot come at the expensive of continued scale up to combat the AIDS epidemic. For one thing, HIV/AIDS in inextricably linked to child and maternal health. In Sub‐Saharan Africa, antiretroviral drugs are critical to addressing maternal and child mortality, and robust scale-up of ARVs will mean millions of women’s lives saved from HIV and tuberculosis. It will mean fewer AIDS orphans and fewer HIV-positive babies.

“HIV remains the largest cause of maternal mortality in some countries and community‐wide coverage of ART is increasingly being shown to decrease non‐HIV infant mortality, poverty, and deaths from diseases like TB,” the memo to Dr. Goosby says. “It is also important to note that Lantos‐Hyde prioritizes scale‐up of PMTCT programs and expansion of ART treatment for HIV‐infected children—priorities that will not be realized in the absence of increased investment in ARV treatment and ambitious treatment targets.” (more…)


Read Full Post »

You’ll find the answer to that question, and other fresh insights into the Administration’s plans for PEPFAR, in this ScienceInsider interview with Dr. Goosby, President Obama’s global AIDS coordinator.

Among the highlights, Dr. Goosby tells SI that efforts to nix the ban on needle-exchange programs are well underway within the Administration and the PEPFAR office. “I have spent much of my life focused on matching demographics to responses. If you do not base responses to the demographics of your epidemic, you will not be successful at reaching the populations who are already infected,” Dr. Goosby says. When asked how he plans to get around the ban, Dr. Goosby notes that it’s domestic prohibition and PEPFAR is not subject to it.

Asked about what it’s like to take over such a successful initiative, Dr. Goosby gave this answer: “I’m grateful to PEPFAR for the work it has done, putting a finger in the dike, but we have by no means reached the threshold by which we can relax or view this as a job well done. The job that has been done is precariously positioned to not sustain itself.”

On what direction PEPFAR is headed, he offered this: “We need to look at how to build country-based, country-run, country-owned delivery systems. We can’t just build islands of excellence with HIV care and not address the larger health needs of that same individual. That’s shortsighted. The president and Secretary Clinton have been very clear about wanting all the vertical programs—HIV, TB, malaria, immunization, maternal and child health—to now look at expanding the service constellation and bringing in those broader health needs of what is a complete overlap in populations. The discussion is mostly focused on using women as that access point to children, husbands, and partners.”

At the end of the interview, Dr. Goosby talked about the mismatch between the current scientific and budget realities:

“It’s a no brainer in terms of the science to use tenofovir instead of d4T [an ARV that has serious side effects]. The problem is the cost. The same with using the current policy of 200 CD4 cells to start treatment versus 350 CD4s as the cutoff. The science has been there for a long time. That’s why no else is doing 200. The United States has been at 350 forever. You could argue we should be in the 400 to 500 range. The science is clear. What isn’t clear is how we can pay for that. We need to be honest: We’re in the business of trying to find resources to cover that extraordinary expansion of need. And the elephant in the room again is the second-line treatment cost, going up three, four times the cost of first-line for the most part. That’s the final thing that keeps me up at night.”

Read Full Post »