Bringing Gene Therapies for HIV Disease to Resource-Limited Parts of the World

Erratum to: Progress Note 2024: Curing HIV; Not in My Lifetime or Just Around the Corner?

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.20411/pai.v8i2.665.].

Progress Note 2024: Curing HIV; Not in My Lifetime or Just Around the Corner?

Once a death sentence, HIV is now considered a manageable chronic disease due to the development of antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens with minimal toxicity and a high barrier for genetic resistance. While highly effective in arresting AIDS progression and rendering the virus untransmissible in people living with HIV (PLWH) with undetectable viremia (U=U) [1, 2]), ART alone is incapable of eradicating the "reservoir" of resting, latently infected CD4+ T cells from which virus recrudesces upon treatment cessation. As of 2022 estimates, there are 39 million PLWH, of whom 86% are aware of their status and 76% are receiving ART [3]. As of 2017, ART-treated PLWH exhibit near normalized life expectancies without adjustment for socioeconomic differences [4]. Furthermore, there is a global deceleration in the rate of new infections [3] driven by expanded access to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), HIV testing in vulnerable populations, and by ART treatment [5]. Therefore, despite outstanding issues pertaining to cost and access in developing countries, there is strong enthusiasm that aggressive testing, treatment, and effective viral suppression may be able to halt the ongoing HIV epidemic (ie, UNAIDS' 95-95-95 targets) [6-8]; especially as evidenced by recent encouraging observations in Sydney [9]. Despite these promising efforts to limit further viral transmission, for PLWH, a "cure" remains elusive; whether it be to completely eradicate the viral reservoir (ie, cure) or to induce long-term viral remission in the absence of ART (ie, control; Figure 1). In a previous salon hosted by Pathogens and Immunity in 2016 [10], some researchers were optimistic that a cure was a feasible, scalable goal, albeit with no clear consensus on the best route. So, how are these cure strategies panning out? In this commentary, 8 years later, we will provide a brief overview on recent advances and failures towards identifying determinants of viral persistence and developing a scalable cure for HIV. Based on these observations, and as in the earlier salon, we have asked several prominent HIV cure researchers for their perspectives.

The long-term impact and value of curative therapy for HIV: a modelling analysis

INTRODUCTION

Curative therapies (CTx) to achieve durable remission of HIV disease without the need for antiretroviral therapy (ART) are currently being explored. Our objective was to model the long-term health and cost outcomes of HIV in various countries, the impact of future CTx on those outcomes and the country-specific value-based prices (VBPs) of CTx.

METHODS

We developed a decision-analytic model to estimate the future health economic impacts of a hypothetical CTx for HIV in countries with pre-existing access to ART (CTx+ART), compared to ART alone. We modelled populations in seven low-and-middle-income countries and five high-income countries, accounting for localized ART and other HIV-related costs, and calibrating variables for HIV epidemiology and ART uptake to reproduce historical HIV outcomes before projecting future outcomes to year 2100. Health was quantified using disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Base case, pessimistic and optimistic scenarios were modelled for CTx+ART and ART alone. Based on long-term outcomes and each country's estimated health opportunity cost, we calculated the country-specific VBP of CTx.

RESULTS

The introduction of a hypothetical CTx lowered HIV prevalence and prevented future infections over time, which increased life-years, reduced the number of individuals on ART, reduced AIDS-related deaths, and ultimately led to fewer DALYs versus ART-alone. Our base case estimates for the VBP of CTx ranged from $5400 (Kenya) up to $812,300 (United States). Within each country, the VBP was driven to be greater primarily by lower ART coverage, lower HIV incidence and prevalence, and higher CTx cure probability. The VBP estimates were found to be greater in countries where HIV prevalence was higher, ART coverage was lower and the health opportunity cost was greater.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results quantify the VBP for future curative CTx that may apply in different countries and under different circumstances. With greater CTx cure probability, durability and scale up, CTx commands a higher VBP, while improvements in ART coverage may mitigate its value. Our framework can be utilized for estimating this cost given a wide range of scenarios related to the attributes of a given CTx as well as various parameters of the HIV epidemic within a given country.

Ethical and practical considerations for cell and gene therapy toward an HIV cure: findings from a qualitative in-depth interview study in the United States

BACKGROUND

HIV cure research involving cell and gene therapy has intensified in recent years. There is a growing need to identify ethical standards and safeguards to ensure cell and gene therapy (CGT) HIV cure research remains valued and acceptable to as many stakeholders as possible as it advances on a global scale.

METHODS

To elicit preliminary ethical and practical considerations to guide CGT HIV cure research, we implemented a qualitative, in-depth interview study with three key stakeholder groups in the United States: (1) biomedical HIV cure researchers, (2) bioethicists, and (3) community stakeholders. Interviews permitted evaluation of informants' perspectives on how CGT HIV cure research should ethically occur, and were transcribed verbatim. We applied conventional content analysis focused on inductive reasoning to analyze the rich qualitative data and derive key ethical and practical considerations related to CGT towards an HIV cure.

RESULTS

We interviewed 13 biomedical researchers, 5 community members, and 1 bioethicist. Informants generated considerations related to: perceived benefits of CGT towards an HIV cure, perceived risks, considerations necessary to ensure an acceptable benefit/risk balance, CGT strategies considered unacceptable, additional ethical considerations, and considerations for first-in-human CGT HIV cure trials. Informants also proposed important safeguards to developing CGT approaches towards an HIV cure, such as the importance of mitigating off-target effects, mitigating risks associated with long-term duration of CGT interventions, and mitigating risks of immune overreactions.

CONCLUSION

Our study identified preliminary considerations for CGT-based HIV cure across three key stakeholder groups. Respondents identified an ideal cure strategy as one which would durably control HIV infection, protect the individual from re-acquisition, and eliminate transmission to others. Known and unknown risks should be anticipated and perceived as learning opportunities to preserve and honor the altruism of participants. Preclinical studies should support these considerations and be transparently reviewed by regulatory experts and peers prior to first-in-human studies. To protect the public trust in CGT HIV cure research, ethical and practical considerations should be periodically revisited and updated as the science continues to evolve. Additional ethics studies are required to expand stakeholder participation to include traditionally marginalized groups and clinical care providers.