Bad News On Big AIDS Drug

[+ Lucky]

The drug Truvada, taken by many long-term survivors of HIV, causes kidney damage, and the more it is taken, the more damage it causes. I am not a scientist, so I will leave you with a link, but as I recall, Truvada was being touted not long ago as a prophylactic possibility for those engaging in unprotected sex, or as a treatment to be taken immediately after a condom failure. Wonder how this news might change that:

 

http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2012/02/11508/tenofovir-leading-hiv-medication-linked-risk-kidney-damage

[doitb4ugo]

This is certainly not good news, Lucky. Thanks for this post. I will need to followup with my doctor to see what he thinks...For me Truvada has worked extrememly well and the expectation was that it was both safe and effective(as much as such a thing is possible).

[justaguy]

Lucky, thanks for this article. These drugs are still relatively new so there hasn't been enough time to do longitudinal studies on all the different drugs. As with most drugs this powerful, there are bound to be side effects and the patient has to way the risks against the benefits. The article says that the markers for kidney damage associated with this drug isn't found with other retroviral drugs but doesn't say which ones they looked at. My hope is that the other drugs prove to be less damaging.

[maxwellissmart]

The drug Truvada, taken by many long-term survivors of HIV, causes kidney damage, and the more it is taken, the more damage it causes. I am not a scientist, so I will leave you with a link, but as I recall, Truvada was being touted not long ago as a prophylactic possibility for those engaging in unprotected sex, or as a treatment to be taken immediately after a condom failure. Wonder how this news might change that:

 

http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2012/02/11508/tenofovir-leading-hiv-medication-linked-risk-kidney-damage

 

This isn't new news. It's been stated for quite some time now that Truvada is linked to possible kidney, liver and bone problems, (there is some conflict as to whether the drug CAUSES the problems, or exacerbates existing issues) in the Truvada literature, and in statements issued by a number of HIV-related health sites. Just Google "truvada" and "kidney" and quite a bit of information comes up. The thing is—ALL of the HIV drugs have long-term side effects, and some are just coming to light. In the grand scheme of things—you'll have to weigh whether the potential for kidney damage is worse than... well, death.

 

Most people take Truvada without many side effects.

 

Possible side effects include nausea (which usually gets better over time,) headache, muscle aches, kidney problems, liver problems, allergy or skin discoloration. Usually you will have blood tests done in the first month to look for the beneficial effects of Truvada and any side effects. Rarely Truvada can cause kidney problems, usually in persons with underlying kidney disease or people who have lost a lot of weight. There is also the possibility that Truvada can cause thinning of the bones which might result in bones which break more easily; however, the significance of this is unclear at this time.

[+ Lucky]

The study is new. Note that just last year they were saying that people could take Truvada as a preventive for HIV without fear of kidney problems.

SFGate.com has an article on this today:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/18/MNAS1N8SHA.DTL&tsp=1

[maxwellissmart]

The study is new. Note that just last year they were saying that people could take Truvada as a preventive for HIV without fear of kidney problems.

SFGate.com has an article on this today:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/18/MNAS1N8SHA.DTL&tsp=1

 

"You're willing to sacrifice a little bit of long-term kidney damage when it's keeping you alive in the short-term," said Dr. Michael Shlipak, chief of general internal medicine at the VA medical center and an author of the study. "But as HIV becomes a longer and longer chronic disease, people may be on these drugs for 20 years, and that risk is really going to add up.

 

While that statement may be true, if someone takes Truvada for the next twenty years—here's the thing, these drugs are going to change significantly in 5 years, let alone two decades. There may be a cure by then. And while AZT is still often a basic component of cocktail-based therapy, the approaches to fighting AIDS and HIV are markedly different than when AZT first came out.

[nate_sf]

The drug Truvada, taken by many long-term survivors of HIV, causes kidney damage, and the more it is taken, the more damage it causes. I am not a scientist, so I will leave you with a link, but as I recall, Truvada was being touted not long ago as a prophylactic possibility for those engaging in unprotected sex, or as a treatment to be taken immediately after a condom failure. Wonder how this news might change that:

 

http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2012/02/11508/tenofovir-leading-hiv-medication-linked-risk-kidney-damage

 

As Maxwell says, pretty much all of the drugs have some kind of side effects, and some quite serious, so one has to weigh the alternative of whether it is worse than not taking medication and having HIV take its toll.

 

I'd also heard about the kidney issues before this, which I think is part of the reason the idea of Truvada being touted as a prophylactic possibility may have waned. That, and the extremely high cost of the drug.

[Bosguy]

As Maxwell says, pretty much all of the drugs have some kind of side effects, and some quite serious, so one has to weigh the alternative of whether it is worse than not taking medication and having HIV take its toll.

 

I'd also heard about the kidney issues before this, which I think is part of the reason the idea of Truvada being touted as a prophylactic possibility may have waned. That, and the extremely high cost of the drug.

 

It is absolutely incredible have serious kidney and liver side effects--practically all blood pressure, colesterol, and athritis prescriptions are involved--even many basic over the counter basic medications. The extent and severity is mind boggling. All you can do at this time is consult with your pharmacist and physician and demand to know all side effects before taking anything. How so many with these side effects get on the market is questionable at best and why do so many have to have these side effects? Power of the multi billion dollar pharmaceutical corporations and their financial contributions to the medical community?

 

Why do I feel so strongly about this? Seven years ago my blood pressure medicine was changed without proper evaluation resulting in me requiring paddles to bring me back to life TWICE! I am ver pro patient rights and anti drug manufacturers and hope everyone knows their rights and demands them

 

Boston Bill

[Bosguy]

As Maxwell says, pretty much all of the drugs have some kind of side effects, and some quite serious, so one has to weigh the alternative of whether it is worse than not taking medication and having HIV take its toll.

 

I'd also heard about the kidney issues before this, which I think is part of the reason the idea of Truvada being touted as a prophylactic possibility may have waned. That, and the extremely high cost of the drug.

 

It is absolutely incredible that so many prescription drugs have serious kidney and liver side effects--practically all blood pressure, colesterol, and athritis prescriptions are involved--even many basic over the counter medications. The extent and severity is mind boggling. All you can do at this time is consult with your pharmacist and physician and demand to know all side effects before taking anything. How so many with these side effects get on the market is questionable at best and why do so many have to have these side effects? Power of the multi billion dollar pharmaceutical corporations and their financial contributions to the medical community?

 

Why do I feel so strongly about this? Seven years ago my blood pressure medicine was changed without proper evaluation resulting in me requiring paddles to bring me back to life TWICE! I am very pro patient rights and anti drug manufacturers and hope everyone knows their rights and demands that these rights be fully adhered to.

 

Boston Bill

[+ Lucky]

The fact that AIDS drugs have bad side effects is known, but this study proves one of them.

Here is what was being said just last month on Truvada:

Michael Weinstein, president the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, based in Los Angeles. There are nearly 42,000 Californians [PDF] living with HIV as of June 2011.

 

Weinstein added that as an HIV treatment, he thinks Truvada is a "fabulous drug - it's one pill once a day, and it has a low side-effect burden," which include nausea, vomiting and weight loss.

 

 

This new pharmaceutical prevention approach to HIV and AIDS is known in scientific circles as "pre-exposure prophylaxis," or PrEP, and it involves taking the antiretroviral medications on a daily basis. Clinical trials supported by the National Institutes of Health have shown that when taken daily, Truvada, a blue oval pill, reduced the risk for contracting HIV by between 44 percent among gay men in four countries and 73 percent by heterosexual couples in Uganda and Kenya. One trial among women in sub-Saharan Africa was stopped in April 2011.

 

Overall, these studies have generated enthusiasm among many medical researchers.

 

Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation: Weinstein added that as an HIV treatment, he thinks Truvada is a "fabulous drug - it's one pill once a day, and it has a low side-effect burden," which include nausea, vomiting and weight loss.

 

The drug is "an incredible achievement, a wonderful new tool that could be available to people who need additional protection against the acquisition of HIV," said Veronica Miller, executive director of The Forum for Collaborative HIV Research and a visiting professor at the UC Berkeley School of Public Health.

 

The Annals of the Forum for Collaborative HIV Research noted that the drug had performed well in clinical trials; the safety risk is relatively low; and as a result, doctors can currently prescribe the drug for prevention off-label.

[+ Lucky]

The fact that AIDS drugs have bad side effects is known, but this study proves one of them.

Here is what was being said just last month in an article in Huffington post dated January 30th on Truvada:

 

This new pharmaceutical prevention approach to HIV and AIDS is known in scientific circles as "pre-exposure prophylaxis," or PrEP, and it involves taking the antiretroviral medications on a daily basis. Clinical trials supported by the National Institutes of Health have shown that when taken daily, Truvada, a blue oval pill, reduced the risk for contracting HIV by between 44 percent among gay men in four countries and 73 percent by heterosexual couples in Uganda and Kenya. One trial among women in sub-Saharan Africa was stopped in April 2011.

 

Overall, these studies have generated enthusiasm among many medical researchers.

 

Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation: Weinstein added that as an HIV treatment, he thinks Truvada is a "fabulous drug - it's one pill once a day, and it has a low side-effect burden," which include nausea, vomiting and weight loss.

 

The drug is "an incredible achievement, a wonderful new tool that could be available to people who need additional protection against the acquisition of HIV," said Veronica Miller, executive director of The Forum for Collaborative HIV Research and a visiting professor at the UC Berkeley School of Public Health.

 

The Annals of the Forum for Collaborative HIV Research noted that the drug had performed well in clinical trials; the safety risk is relatively low; and as a result, doctors can currently prescribe the drug for prevention off-label.

[seeker630]

It is absolutely incredible that so many prescription drugs have serious kidney and liver side effects--practically all blood pressure, colesterol, and athritis prescriptions are involved--even many basic over the counter medications. The extent and severity is mind boggling. All you can do at this time is consult with your pharmacist and physician and demand to know all side effects before taking anything. How so many with these side effects get on the market is questionable at best and why do so many have to have these side effects? Power of the multi billion dollar pharmaceutical corporations and their financial contributions to the medical community?

 

Why do I feel so strongly about this? Seven years ago my blood pressure medicine was changed without proper evaluation resulting in me requiring paddles to bring me back to life TWICE! I am very pro patient rights and anti drug manufacturers and hope everyone knows their rights and demands that these rights be fully adhered to.

 

Boston Bill

 

It is unlikely that there will ever be a drug with no side effects - the human body is too complex and the systems are so interdependent that it's virtually impossible to affect only a single thing without affecting others as well. So, we all weigh the benefit vs the unintended consequences of any treatment. And not everyone experiences the same effects from a drug. Sometimes it takes hundreds of thousands of patients and/or years of use to uncover some side effects.

 

There are, however, certainly cases in which the monetary considerations of getting a drug to market were given priority over possible safety issues.

[nate_sf]

Thanks for the additional background info Lucky. You are right, Truvada was being touted as "pre-exposure prophylaxis" and the side effects were described as minimal. Perhaps when they were talking about side effects they were talking about the side effects one experiences from taking the pill such as nausea, vomiting and weight loss. I think generally it's considered tolerable (especially compared to other medications) in terms of being able to take it once a day and have an otherwise normal existence. But either they weren't aware of or weren't fully disclosing the side effects on internal organs like the kidneys.

 

I see in the new study that's just been published involved more than 10,000 subjects so its findings show new light and have significance on the subject because it is such a large sample.