Jacobson M A, French M
Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, USA.
AIDS. 1998;12 Suppl A:S157-63.
Since potent HIV protease inhibitor drugs became widely available in early 1996, many HIV clinical specialists have noted a marked decrease in the occurrence of AIDS-related opportunistic infections, and some specialists have reported unusual clinical presentations and manifestations of previously common opportunistic infections. In this article, we will review (1) the available data regarding recent trends in AIDS-related opportunistic infections incidence and manifestations, (2) clinical and immunologic evidence that potent combination antiretroviral therapy can alter the natural history of these opportunistic infections, and (3) the implications of these findings for current patient management practice and future clinical and immunologic research. As a preface to this review, however, it is important to acknowledge that any evaluation of the potential benefit of potent combination antiretroviral therapy in reducing the risk of serious opportunistic infections can be confounded by the concomitant use of prophylactic antimicrobial agents co-administered to prevent specific opportunistic infections. For example, it is standard clinical practice to administer trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (or another agent if trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole cannot be tolerated) to patients with an absolute CD4 lymphocyte count < 200 cells/microliters, unexplained chronic fever or a history of oropharyngeal candidiasis. Similarly, specific antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent disseminated Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) infection in patients with absolute CD4 counts < 50 cells/microliters is also a widely recommended guideline. Although the relative efficacies of specific antimicrobial prophylaxis regimens in preventing the most common life- and sight-threatening opportunistic infectious complications of AIDS [Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP), disseminated MAC infection, and cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis] are now well established, these relative efficacies were established in the era before potent combination antiretroviral therapies became available and may not be generalizable to the current era. Nevertheless, for perspective, the reported efficacies of prophylaxis for PCP, disseminated MAC infection, and CMV end-organ disease are summarized in Table 1.
自1996年初强效HIV蛋白酶抑制剂药物广泛应用以来,许多HIV临床专家注意到与艾滋病相关的机会性感染发生率显著下降,一些专家报告了以前常见的机会性感染出现了不寻常的临床表现。在本文中,我们将回顾:(1)关于艾滋病相关机会性感染发生率和表现的近期趋势的现有数据;(2)强效联合抗逆转录病毒疗法可改变这些机会性感染自然病程的临床和免疫学证据;(3)这些发现对当前患者管理实践以及未来临床和免疫学研究的影响。然而,作为本综述的前言,必须承认,在评估强效联合抗逆转录病毒疗法在降低严重机会性感染风险方面的潜在益处时,可能会因同时使用预防性抗菌药物来预防特定机会性感染而受到混淆。例如,对于绝对CD4淋巴细胞计数<200个细胞/微升、不明原因慢性发热或有口咽念珠菌病史的患者,给予甲氧苄啶-磺胺甲恶唑(或如果不能耐受甲氧苄啶-磺胺甲恶唑则给予另一种药物)是标准临床实践。同样,对于绝对CD4计数<50个细胞/微升的患者,给予特定抗菌预防以防止播散性鸟分枝杆菌复合体(MAC)感染也是一项广泛推荐的指南。虽然现在已经明确了特定抗菌预防方案在预防艾滋病最常见的危及生命和视力的机会性感染并发症[卡氏肺孢子虫肺炎(PCP)、播散性MAC感染和巨细胞病毒(CMV)视网膜炎]方面的相对疗效,但这些相对疗效是在强效联合抗逆转录病毒疗法出现之前的时代确定的,可能不适用于当前时代。尽管如此,为了提供参考,PCP、播散性MAC感染和CMV终末器官疾病的预防报告疗效总结在表1中。