Doctors now have convincing evidence that they put HIV into
remission, hopefully for good, in a Mississippi baby born with the AIDS
virus — a medical first that is prompting a new look at how hard and
fast such cases should be treated.
The case was reported earlier this year but some doctors were
skeptical that the baby was really infected rather than testing positive
because of exposure to virus in the mom's blood.
The new report, published online Wednesday by the New England Journal
of Medicine, makes clear that the girl, now 3, was infected in the
womb. She was treated unusually aggressively and shows no active
infection despite stopping AIDS medicines 18 months ago.
Doctors won't call it a cure because they don't know what proof or
how much time is needed to declare someone free of HIV infection, long
feared to be permanent.
"We want to be very cautious here. We're calling it remission because
we'd like to observe the child for a longer time and be absolutely sure
there's no rebound," said Dr. Katherine Luzuriaga, a University of
Massachusetts AIDS expert involved in the baby's care.
The government's top AIDS scientist, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of
the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, agreed.
"At minimum, the baby is in a clear remission. It is possible that
the baby has actually been cured. We don't have a definition for cure as
we do for certain cancers, where after five years or so you can be
relatively certain the person is not going to go and relapse," he said. A
scientist at his institute did sophisticated tests that showed no
active virus in the child.
A government-sponsored international study starting in January aims
to test early treatment in babies born with HIV to see if the results in
this case can be reproduced.
Most HIV-infected moms in the U.S. get AIDS medicines during
pregnancy, which greatly cuts the chances they will pass the virus to
their babies. But the Mississippi mom got no prenatal care and her HIV
was discovered during labor. Doctors considered the baby to be at such
high risk that they started the child on three powerful medicines 30
hours after birth, rather than waiting for a test to confirm infection
as is usually done.
Within a month, the baby's virus fell to undetectable levels. She
remained on treatment until she was 18 months old when doctors lost
contact with her. Ten months later when she returned, they could find no
sign of infection even though the mom had stopped giving the child AIDS
medicines.
Only one other person is thought to have been cured of HIV infection —
a San Francisco man who had a bone marrow transplant in 2007 from a
donor with natural resistance to HIV, and showed no sign of infection
five years later.
In the Mississippi baby, "there's no immune mechanism we can identify
that would keep the virus in check" like that bone marrow donor, said
another study author, Dr. Deborah Persaud of the Johns Hopkins
Children's Center, who helped investigate the case because she has
researched treatment in children.
Dr. Peter Havens, pediatric HIV chief at Children's Hospital of
Wisconsin and a government adviser on HIV treatment guidelines, said the
child may have an undiscovered genetic trait that helped her manage the
virus.
"I'm just not convinced that her dramatic response would be
replicable in a large population," he said. It's too soon to recommend
treating other high-risk babies so aggressively without more study, he
said.
In the upcoming study, doctors plan to give AIDS medicines for at
least two years and watch for signs of remission before suspending
treatment and seeing whether a remission results.
The Mississippi case "did open people's eyes further" about a
possible cure, Luzuriaga said. "We might be able to intervene early and
spare children a lifetime of therapy. That is the potential impact of
this case."
No comments:
Post a Comment