Failed vaccine is another blow for HIV control
An adenovirus vaccine designed to boost cell mediated immunity against HIV has failed, disappointing HIV researchers and casting doubt on the animal models that suggested it might work. The vaccine, which expressed three HIV genes—gag, pol, and nef—did not prevent infections in participants in a placebo controlled trial and had no effect on viral replication in those infected. The data monitoring committee recognised the futility of the trial at its first meeting, when it became clear that men given the vaccine were, if anything, more likely than controls to get HIV (4.6% v 3.1% each year; hazard ratio 1.5, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.3). The trial included 3000 men and women at high risk, mostly men who have sex with men and women at high risk because of sex work or drug use. Exploratory analyses suggested the increased risk was confined to uncircumcised men (3.8, 1.5 to 9.3) and those with antibodies against the adenovirus vector (2.3, 1.2 to 4.3).
The researchers don’t know yet why the vaccine failed, when a prototype worked well in standard primate models. They looked for differences in immune responses between men who became HIV positive and those who didn’t (doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61593-7). There weren’t any—the vaccine looked immunogenic in both groups, inducing HIV specific T cells as expected. But the response clearly wasn’t good enough, possibly because it was too weak, too narrow, or somehow qualitatively wrong, say the researchers. After decades of research, we still don’t know what an effective immune response to HIV looks like.
Antioxidant supplements fail to prevent cardiovascular disease, again
Antioxidant vitamins C and E do not prevent cardiovascular disease in healthy middle aged men, according to a placebo controlled trial of US doctors. The trial lasted 10 years and included 14 641 male doctors who were at least 50 when enrolled. Most (94.9%) had no cardiovascular disease …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
The decline in the breast cancer incidence is 1.2% and it is not significant.
Published 10 February 2012
'twas ever thus
Published 10 February 2012
The value of historic human remains
Published 10 February 2012
In Praise of British Literature
Published 10 February 2012
Is real shared decision making possible?
Published 10 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (7 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
Search for evidence goes on (5 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012