Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
Why it’s time to say goodbye to stavudine ... everywhere
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Andrieux-Meyer, Isabelle Clayden, Polly Collins, Simon J. Geffen, Nathan Goemaere, Eric Harrington, Mark K. Lynch, Sharonann Swan, Tracy |
| Copyright Year | 2012 |
| Abstract | The previous issue of the SAJHIV (December 2011) carried an Opinion piece by Innes, Cotton and Venter regarding the potential value of low-dose of stavudine (20 mg twice a day). They suggested that reduced dosing of stavudine may lead to levels of viral suppression comparable with those achieved with stavudine 30 mg bd but with a lower risk of toxicity and side-effects, and at a fraction of the cost of tenofovir. The Opinion was related to a larger proposal, led by Venter, to conduct a head-to-head trial comparing low-dose stavudine with tenofovir (both in a regimen including lamivudine and efavirenz) on viral suppression and other treatment outcomes over 24 months. There has been considerable debate regarding the advantages and disadvantages of low-dose stavudine, and in turn the value of any such trial. Here the debate continues with a commentary by Isabelle Andrieux-Meyer et al. and a rebuttal by Venter and colleagues. |
| Starting Page | 17 |
| Ending Page | 19 |
| Page Count | 3 |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| DOI | 10.4102/sajhivmed.v13i1.155 |
| Volume Number | 13 |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://sajhivmed.org.za/index.php/hivmed/article/download/155/258 |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhivmed.v13i1.155 |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
