Absence of Proviral Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Type 1 Evolution in Early-Treated Individuals With HIV Switching to Dolutegravir Monotherapy During 48 Weeks

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection is treated with antiretroviral therapy (ART), usually consisting of 2-3 different drugs, referred to as combination ART (cART). Our recent randomized clinical trial comparing a switch to dolutegravir monotherapy with continuation of cART in early-treated individuals demonstrated sustained virological suppression over 48 weeks. Here, we characterize the longitudinal landscape of the HIV-1 reservoir in these participants, with particular attention to potential differences between treatment groups regarding evidence of evolution as a proxy for low-level replication. Near full-length HIV-1 proviral polymerase chain reaction and next-generation sequencing was applied to longitudinal peripheral blood mononuclear cell samples to assess proviral evolution and the potential emergence of drug resistance mutations (DRMs). Neither an increase in genetic distance nor diversity over time was detected in participants of both treatment groups. Single proviral analysis showed high proportions of defective proviruses and low DRM numbers. No evidence for evolution during dolutegravir monotherapy was found in these early-treated individuals

Sex and gender in infection and immunity: addressing the bottlenecks from basic science to public health and clinical applications

Although sex and gender are recognized as major determinants of health and immunity, their role israrely considered in clinical practice and public health. We identified six bottlenecks preventing theinclusion of sex and gender considerations from basic science to clinical practice, precision medicineand public health policies. (i) A terminology-related bottleneck, linked to the definitions of sex andgender themselves, and the lack of consensus on how to evaluate gender. (ii) A data-relatedbottleneck, due to gaps in sex-disaggregated data, data on trans/non-binary people and genderidentity. (iii) A translational bottleneck, limited by animal models and the underrepresentation ofgender minorities in biomedical studies. (iv) A statistical bottleneck, with inappropriate statisticalanalyses and results interpretation. (v) An ethical bottleneck posed by the underrepresentation ofpregnant people and gender minorities in clinical studies. (vi) A structural bottleneck, as systemicbias and discriminations affect not only academic research but also decision makers. We specifyguidelines for researchers, scientific journals, funding agencies and academic institutions to addressthese bottlenecks. Following such guidelines will support the development of more efficient andequitable care strategies for all

Sex and gender in infection and immunity: addressing the bottlenecks from basic science to public health and clinical applications.

Although sex and gender are recognized as major determinants of health and immunity, their role is rarely considered in clinical practice and public health. We identified six bottlenecks preventing the inclusion of sex and gender considerations from basic science to clinical practice, precision medicine and public health policies. (i) A terminology-related bottleneck, linked to the definitions of sex and gender themselves, and the lack of consensus on how to evaluate gender. (ii) A data-related bottleneck, due to gaps in sex-disaggregated data, data on trans/non-binary people and gender identity. (iii) A translational bottleneck, limited by animal models and the underrepresentation of gender minorities in biomedical studies. (iv) A statistical bottleneck, with inappropriate statistical analyses and results interpretation. (v) An ethical bottleneck posed by the underrepresentation of pregnant people and gender minorities in clinical studies. (vi) A structural bottleneck, as systemic bias and discriminations affect not only academic research but also decision makers. We specify guidelines for researchers, scientific journals, funding agencies and academic institutions to address these bottlenecks. Following such guidelines will support the development of more efficient and equitable care strategies for all

Sex and gender in infection and immunity: addressing the bottlenecks from basic science to public health and clinical applications

Although sex and gender are recognized as major determinants of health and immunity, their role is rarely considered in clinical practice and public health. We identified six bottlenecks preventing the inclusion of sex and gender considerations from basic science to clinical practice, precision medicine and public health policies. (i) A terminology-related bottleneck, linked to the definitions of sex and gender themselves, and the lack of consensus on how to evaluate gender. (ii) A data-related bottleneck, due to gaps in sex-disaggregated data, data on trans/non-binary people and gender identity. (iii) A translational bottleneck, limited by animal models and the underrepresentation of gender minorities in biomedical studies. (iv) A statistical bottleneck, with inappropriate statistical analyses and results interpretation. (v) An ethical bottleneck posed by the underrepresentation of pregnant people and gender minorities in clinical studies. (vi) A structural bottleneck, as systemic bias and discriminations affect not only academic research but also decision makers. We specify guidelines for researchers, scientific journals, funding agencies and academic institutions to address these bottlenecks. Following such guidelines will support the development of more efficient and equitable care strategies for all

Sex and gender in infection and immunity: addressing the bottlenecks from basic science to public health and clinical applications

Although sex and gender are recognized as major determinants of health and immunity, their role is rarely considered in clinical practice and public health. We identified six bottlenecks preventing the inclusion of sex and gender considerations from basic science to clinical practice, precision medicine and public health policies. (i) A terminology-related bottleneck, linked to the definitions of sex and gender themselves, and the lack of consensus on how to evaluate gender. (ii) A data-related bottleneck, due to gaps in sex-disaggregated data, data on trans/non-binary people and gender identity. (iii) A translational bottleneck, limited by animal models and the underrepresentation of gender minorities in biomedical studies. (iv) A statistical bottleneck, with inappropriate statistical analyses and results interpretation. (v) An ethical bottleneck posed by the underrepresentation of pregnant people and gender minorities in clinical studies. (vi) A structural bottleneck, as systemic bias and discriminations affect not only academic research but also decision makers. We specify guidelines for researchers, scientific journals, funding agencies and academic institutions to address these bottlenecks. Following such guidelines will support the development of more efficient and equitable care strategies for all.ISSN:2054-570