Yea i read that on the news yesterday let's see what out scholars Studyforhope, stiff & Stephen are their thoughts on this clinical
I don't know much about HIV, but I don't think the treatment will help HBV.
First of all HIV is a RNA virus. On entering a CD4 Helper T cell(its preferred host, as opposed to liver cells for HBV), the virus needs to change is RNA into DNA, this reverse transcription is similar to that for HBV in its replication step, hence some HIV drugs will work for HBV too. Once the HIV RNA is changed into DNA, the DNA enters the nucleus of the T cells, attaches to the host's genome, as a provirus and become dormant. When the HIV provirus is dormant, its host T cell is not recognised by the immune system as being infected. So to effect a complete cure, all dormant HIV infected T cells must be awaken first - this difficulty is akin to getting rid of cccDNA).
Just my understanding.
When these results are replicated in the rest of that cohort, sustained over a period of years with absence of ART, and applied successfully to persons with longstanding HIV infections, then maybe talk about an HIV cure.
In the meantime, there are plenty of new therapies for HBV undergoing trials. Things could be worse.
i agree there are too many claims on hiv better wait for a real and big clinical trial and anyway we already have a cure to look for which is replicor
I just spoke to professor Lok and i asked her about the future treatment and trials. She told me that she had a meeting recently with the europeans and they talked about the trials etc... And they concluded that hbv is much harder to cure than hcv and they might not see a cure during their lifetime. so not sound like a great future waiting for us
The professor Lok is well known and she put most of the guidelines in US. She is old like maybe in her 60's or 70's