Former US president Benjamin Franklin famously said: “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” However, that is not always true when it comes to research into infectious diseases. Though scientists have traditionally tended to focus on either prevention or cure, defeating HIV/AIDS will require researchers — and their funders — to collaborate to address the challenge from both directions.
Advances in prevention and treatment have reduced annual HIV infections by one-third over the past decade and cut AIDS-related deaths by 30 percent over the past five years. Yet 35 million people still live with the virus. Last year, 2.1 million people became infected, and 1.5 million people died from AIDS-related causes. Even in the best-case scenario for maximizing existing prevention and treatment, at least half a million new HIV infections would occur annually in low and middle-income countries by 2050.
The world needs a vaccine and a cure to get ahead of the disease, and great progress is being made in both areas. However, though research in these two distinct fields is beginning to overlap, too many scientists still see themselves as being strictly on one side or the other.
The mechanisms for funding HIV/AIDS research reinforce this separation, because they rarely allow for — much less invite — the kind of innovative cross-field approaches that will be needed to translate recent breakthroughs into testable products. The divide is apparent even among activists and advocates for HIV/AIDS research. It must not be allowed to prevent further progress.
As HIV/AIDS is already the world’s most-studied infectious disease, an HIV diagnosis is no longer a death sentence. Yet the virus is still far from being defeated. Infection rates continue to rise in specific regions and populations, and more than half of the people living with HIV worldwide do not even know that they have it. Three of five HIV-positive people still are not receiving antiretroviral therapy. Moreover, long-term treatment is not the same as a cure, and no public-health tool — apart from clean drinking water — has ever matched the preventive power of a vaccine.
HIV is an extremely complex virus. It mutates rapidly within an individual and among geographic locations, establishing latent reservoirs within cells that enable it to emerge and replicate months or even years later. It evades the immune system, so the body’s natural ability to fight or clear it is limited.
Although there are no precedents that might guide the way to a vaccine or cure, a lot has been learned about how HIV works — and its weaknesses — in the past five years. In 2009, for example, researchers found so-called “proof of concept” when a clinical trial showed that a vaccine could prevent HIV infection in humans, and Timothy Ray Brown — known as “the Berlin patient” — was cured of HIV via a bone-marrow transplant.
Researchers have learned a lot from the responses of three groups of patients. The first group comprises “post-treatment controllers,” in whom early treatment allowed for long-term control of the infection even after anti-retroviral therapy. The second group are “elite controllers,” who can carry HIV for 10 years or more without treatment and without falling ill. The third group, “elite neutralizers,” includes patients who naturally produce antibodies against a wide range of HIV variants.
With the insights gained from following these patients, researchers are increasingly beginning to recognize that the same science might bring both a vaccine and a cure. The two research paths, long pursued in separate labs and discrete projects, have been converging in several exciting areas.
For example, scientists working to design a vaccine to induce production of broadly neutralizing antibodies to protect people from HIV infection have found that these antibodies also control and even clear infection by the simian version of the virus in monkeys. A similar result, dubbed a “functional cure,” has been achieved with a simian vaccine aimed at inducing a response by the monkeys’ “killer T-cells,” another weapon in the immune system’s arsenal. Meanwhile, cure-focused studies of elite controllers are yielding clues about regions of the virus that mutate less, which could hold important lessons for vaccine researchers.
As science advances across disciplines and diseases in ways that were unimaginable even five years ago, the research walls that divide prevention and cure must fall. People must stop weighing pounds against ounces, and collaborate to develop the tools needed to eliminate the HIV/AIDS scourge once and for all.
Francoise Barre-Sinoussi, co-winner of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for the discovery of HIV and former president of the International AIDS Society, is research director at Inserm and a professor at the Institut Pasteur, where she leads the research unit on regulation of retroviral infections. Margie McGlynn is president and chief executive of the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with