A trial comparing tenofovir microbicide with oral PrEP for HIV prevention is dropping the oral arm before the trial completion date. A monitoring board decided that it would not
be possible to demonstrate any difference in effect between tenofovir
PrEP and a placebo in preventing HIV infections. Other arms of the
trial will continue.
Pharmaceutical industry front group
AVAC's Warren Mitchell has expressed disappointment. But adverse
publicity about PrEP is unlikely to be publicized as widely as the
spin associated with favorable results, or results that can be
dressed up as favorable. So far, it is the effectiveness of PrEP in
preventing HIV transmission to women that is still in question. Women
account for the majority of infections in young people in high
prevalence African countries.
The HIV industry has still failed to
show that PrEP, microbicide and various methods said to reduce HIV
transmission do so in the specific case of sexual transmission. It is
possible that drugs like Tenofovir also protect against non-sexual
transmission, such as through unsafe healthcare and cosmetic
services. But even if PrEP does protect against non-sexual
transmission, it will not be the most appropriate strategy in these
instances.
The best way to provide safe healthcare
and cosmetic services is to ensure that strict hygiene and infection
control procedures are followed, something the industry has long
resisted. Separating any effect PrEP and microbicides may have on
non-sexual transmission modes from its effects on sexual transmission
modes would seem like a smart move. After all, there is little point
in targeting populations who will not benefit from it; but nor is
there much point in developing a strategy that is entirely
inappropriate, even when that is where it may produce the best
results.
The trials, the wishful thinking and
the spin continue.
No comments:
Post a Comment