Advertisement
<< Back To Article
Charting the Future of Protease Monotherapy

Write a Comment

I have read and agree to the terms and conditions in the Posting Rules*

3 Comments

Tim Horn, AIDSmeds.com

DaveR -- Apologies for the confusion. I have edited the sentence in question so that the reporting is more clear.

March 27, 2008 New York, NY

Tom

Assuming that people with strong anti-HIV1 immune responses are selected for the studies, this is an idea that is long overdue. We know, from twenty years of clinical studies, that the people who do the best are those with the highest CD4+ T cell nadirs. And we have seen positive results in Induction-Maintenance studies. So, I would expect a select group of patients to realize a benefit from these types of studies. Keep me informed of the studies that open. Thanks!

March 26, 2008

DaveR

why are Monark's results referred to in this article as "questionable?" There's nothing in the article that suggests any problems with his study . . . Who wrote the article? I copy the curious lines below - More recently, the Abbott-funded Monark study compared Kaletra monotherapy to Kaletra plus Combivir (zidovudine plus lamivudine) in 136 first-time treatment takers... Monark’s questionable results, however, have not quashed the possibility of ARV monotherapy.

March 26, 2008 NYC

Advertisement

Hot topics


POZ uses cookies to provide necessary website functionality, improve your experience, analyze our traffic and personalize ads. Our Privacy Policy

Manage

POZ uses cookies to provide necessary website functionality, improve your experience, analyze our traffic and personalize ads. By remaining on our website, you indicate your consent to our Privacy Policy and our Cookie Usage.