An ongoing dialogue on HIV/AIDS, infectious diseases,
January 8th, 2012
Journal Club: In Early HIV Infection, Little Reason to Delay Therapy
Every experienced HIV clinician will recognize the following new-patient scenario:
- At least one, but often several negative HIV antibody tests in the past, generally due to being in a “high risk” group.
- Recent non-specific viral-type illness that, in hindsight, was undoubtedly acute HIV infection, undiagnosed.
- Now completely recovered, but found to be newly HIV antibody positive.
- Physical exam normal, CD4 500 or higher, HIV RNA in the moderate range (10-100K).
How should patients like these be managed? Specifically, should antiretroviral therapy be started, or should they be observed?
Over in Journal of Infectious Diseases, the so-called Setpoint study — a randomized strategy trial — investigated whether a 36-week period of treatment would delay the need to go on continuous HIV therapy, compared with observation. After 130 of a planned 150 patients were enrolled, a Data Safety Monitoring Board elected to stop the study due to this key finding: “… the higher rate of progression to needing treatment in the Deferred Treatment group (50%) versus the Immediate Treatment (10%) group.”
Importantly, the findings would have been even stronger in favor of Immediate Treatment if more up-to-date CD4 thresholds (500 rather than 350) were used as a criterion to start therapy. (The study was designed in the mid 2000s.)
How do these results influence practice? As I’ve noted before, patients diagnosed with recently-acquired HIV infection should be counseled that even if treatment is deferred, there is a high likelihood they will need to start treatment relatively soon.
It’s also time to retire the “you may have 10 years before needing to go on therapy” counseling, something we might have been prone to do in the past to soften the blow of someone hearing that they’re HIV positive. This kind of delay is highly unlikely, and may be limited to the small fraction of patients who have very low HIV RNA and very high CD4s.
Paul E. Sax, MD
Associate Editor
NEJM Clinician
Biography | Disclosures & Summaries
Learn more about HIV and ID Observations.
FROM NEJM — Recent Infectious Disease Articles- Interactive Perspective: Measles December 18, 2025This Double Take video reviews evidence-based recommendations on measles prevention and management and explores commonly asked questions about the measles virus and infection.
- Noninferiority of One HPV Vaccine Dose to Two Doses December 18, 2025In this trial, one dose of an HPV vaccine was noninferior to two doses in preventing HPV type 16 or 18 infection.
- From Crisis to Action — Policy Pathways to Reverse the Rise in Congenital Syphilis December 18, 2025In recent years, cases of congenital syphilis have surged. This trend reflects both prenatal care gaps and systemic issues, including failures in testing, treatment, and public health infrastructure.
- Contact Precautions for MRSA and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus December 18, 2025This feature about the use of contact precautions in the hospital for patients with MRSA or VRE offers a case vignette accompanied by two essays, one supporting continuing the use of contact precautions and the other recommending discontinuing them.
- Evidence to Action — Single-Dose HPV Vaccination and Cervical HPV Infection December 18, 2025Kreimer and colleagues now report in the Journal1 the results of the ESCUDDO trial, which showed that the efficacy of a single dose of either a bivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine or a nonavalent formulation was similar to that of the standard two-dose schedule. This randomized trial...
- Interactive Perspective: Measles December 18, 2025