Journal Article > CommentaryFull Text
Lancet. 2011 July 16; Volume 378 (Issue 9787); 282-4.; DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62303-3
Schouten EJ, Jahn A, Midiani D, Makombe SD, Mnthambala A, et al.
Lancet. 2011 July 16; Volume 378 (Issue 9787); 282-4.; DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62303-3
Journal Article > CommentaryAbstract
Lancet Infect Dis. 2010 January 1; Volume 10 (Issue 1); DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(09)70321-4
Harries AD, Zachariah R, van Oosterhout JJ, Reid SE, Hosseinipour MC, et al.
Lancet Infect Dis. 2010 January 1; Volume 10 (Issue 1); DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(09)70321-4
Despite the enormous progress made in scaling up antiretroviral therapy (ART) in sub-Saharan Africa, many challenges remain, not least of which are the identification and management of patients who have failed first-line therapy. Less than 3% of patients are receiving second-line treatment at present, whereas 15-25% of patients have detectable viral loads 12 months or more into treatment, of whom a substantial proportion might have virological failure. We discuss the reasons why virological ART failure is likely to be under-diagnosed in the routine health system, and address the current difficulties with standard recommended second-line ART regimens. The development of new diagnostic tools for ART failure, in particular a point-of-care HIV viral-load test, combined with simple and inexpensive second-line therapy, such as boosted protease-inhibitor monotherapy, could revolutionise the management of ART failure in resource-limited settings.