Prevention of HIV
Practical HIV prevention in 2024
- Core tools:
- Daily oral PrEP (Truvada, Descovy) for HIV‑negative people at ongoing risk.
- PEP: short antiretroviral course started within 72 hours after a specific exposure.
- Emerging long‑acting injectable PrEP (cabotegravir every 2 months; lenacapavir every 6 months).
- Additional biomedical prevention discussed:
- Vaccines: HPV (Gardasil 9), monkeypox, meningitis ACYW/B (B has partial gonorrhea protection), hepatitis A/B, plus routine childhood vaccines.
- DoxyPEP: two doxycycline pills after sex to cut risk of syphilis, chlamydia, and partially gonorrhea.
- Many note clinics and sexual health services can guide people on PrEP/PEP and broader risk reduction.
U=U (Undetectable = Untransmittable) and viral load
- Several comments emphasize strong evidence that people with consistently suppressed viral load do not sexually transmit HIV, citing large trials in both heterosexual and gay couples.
- Viral-load thresholds are discussed: <200 copies/mL linked to no observed transmission; untreated semen can carry 10,000–1,000,000 copies/mL vs. 1–10 on treatment.
- A minority of commenters question absolute claims of “zero risk” on theoretical virology grounds; others counter that empirical data overwhelmingly support U=U.
Lenacapavir specifics
- Described as a capsid inhibitor that binds HIV p24 and blocks multiple life‑cycle steps (nuclear import, assembly, capsid formation).
- Given as a subcutaneous depot with very long half‑life (on the order of months), attributed to structure and poor solubility.
- Phase 3 prevention trial in ~5,300 high‑risk participants: 55 infections in oral PrEP arms, none in lenacapavir arm; trial stopped early for efficacy.
Resistance and mutation
- Some argue dual‑mechanism or combination regimens make resistance “difficult but not impossible,” noting HIV’s very high mutation rate and need for multi‑drug therapy in treatment.
- Others downplay resistance risk for PrEP, citing long experience with Truvada/Descovy and lack of major resistance problems so far.
Side effects and safety
- Trial reportedly showed excellent short‑term safety; halting was framed as due to both high efficacy and acceptable tolerability.
- Skeptics worry early stopping can exaggerate benefits or miss rare harms; others cite analyses suggesting early stopping is not systematically misleading.
- Long‑term effects of very long‑acting agents and PFAS‑like chemistry are raised but remain unclear in the thread.
Cost, patents, and access
- Strong expectation lenacapavir will be priced at a premium, following Truvada/Descovy patterns (high US list prices despite cheap generics elsewhere).
- Debate over whether high prices are justified by R&D vs. driven by patents, marketing, and oligopolistic behavior.
- Multiple comments note:
- Government and universities often fund early research and, in PrEP’s case, major trials.
- Industry pays for most large clinical trials and commercialization.
- Patients and insurers bear high costs, with especially severe implications for low‑income countries; many foresee reliance on Indian generics for African access.
Behavior, risk groups, and non‑HIV STIs
- Discussion of PrEP use in gay/bi men, sex workers, people who inject drugs, and young women in high‑incidence African settings.
- Some worry “lifestyle PrEP” encourages condomless sex; others argue:
- People already forgo condoms, especially for oral sex.
- Other STIs are typically treatable, whereas HIV is lifelong.
- PrEP users tend to test frequently and may be less likely to transmit STIs overall.
- HSV and some other infections remain difficult to prevent fully; condoms only partially help.
Public vs. private roles
- Extended debate on:
- True cost of drug development (including failed candidates).
- How much of foundational science and clinical work is taxpayer‑funded.
- Whether life‑saving drugs should be for‑profit, price‑regulated, or publicly developed.
- No consensus; many agree that current patent‑driven, high‑price model limits access, especially where HIV burden is highest.