HIV diagnosis during acute infection: implications of long-acting preexposure prophylaxis and other evolving challenges
Résumé fourni par la source
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Tests for HIV may perform differently in some circumstances such as with preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) or other HIV prevention agents. Testing algorithms may not account for this, with a risk of false negative or positive HIV results. In this review we have explored the challenges of HIV testing in these special circumstances. RECENT FINDINGS: Long-acting injectable PrEP using cabotegravir or lenacapavir has been studied in large randomized controlled trials (HPTN083/084 and PURPOSE1/2 respectively). Injectable PrEP was significantly more efficacious than oral PrEP, but infections still occurred risking the emergence of HIV drug-resistance. HIV diagnostic test results were atypical in those receiving injectable PrEP, with low or undetectable HIV viral loads, delayed or diminished antibody, and HIV detection assays reverting from reactive to unreactive; so-called long acting early viral inhibition (LEVI) syndrome. In these cases, missed or delayed HIV diagnoses could be reduced with the use of HIV nucleic acid amplification tests in addition to routine testing, but this remains unfeasible in many settings. SUMMARY: Finding HIV testing strategies that are affordable and practical in low- and middle-income countries that can accurately diagnose HIV in the context of HIV prevention is of high importance, but more research is needed in this area.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- HIV diagnosis during acute infection: implications of long-acting preexposure prophylaxis and other evolving challenges
- Date Crossref
- 17/02/2025
- Éditeur
- Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.