Annals
Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians
:
Advanced search
 
box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
Articles in PubMed by Author:
  arrow  Kravcik, S.
space
 arrow  Related Articles in PubMed
space
 arrow  PubMed Citation
space
 arrow  PubMed
space

LETTER

Cidofovir for Cytomegalovirus Retinitis

right arrow Stephen Kravcik, MD, FRCPC

15 September 1997 | Volume 127 Issue 6 | Page 490


TO THE EDITOR:

The demonstration of the effectiveness of cidofovir to treat cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis adds a welcome third drug to the list of anti-CMV therapies. However, it is most disturbing to find that the two clinical studies of this compound [1, 2] compared it with no treatment ("deferred therapy").

There is no doubt that the natural history of untreated CMV retinitis is one of relentless progression and that ganciclovir [3] and foscarnet [4] are both effective. Therefore, the withholding of proven therapy (even with close follow-up) in the context of a clinical trial to demonstrate the effectiveness of cidofovir is unacceptable. The rationalization that only patients with peripheral retinitis were enrolled is irrelevant and of questionable prudence because 4 of 23 patients in the no-treatment group developed sight-threatening retinitis and another patient developed extraocular CMV infection.

The provision of informed consent by the participants of these studies does not render the withholding of proven therapies for the purposes of demonstrating cidofovir's effectiveness any less unethical. I must admit that I was surprised that these studies were approved by the study institutions' ethics review boards. Similarly, regulatory requirements and the fact that previous studies of anti-CMV therapies have been compared with placebo provide no justification for the nontreatment of an opportunistic infection in an experimental protocol. We would not consider withholding therapy for Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia or cryptococcal meningitis to prove that a new compound is efficacious.

Surely, there must have been enough suspicion of the potential effectiveness of cidofovir to allow for a direct comparison with ganciclovir or foscarnet. This would have been far more ethically acceptable and would have gone far to delineate the potential role of cidofovir in the treatment of CMV retinitis.


Author and Article Information
space
up arrowTop
dotAuthor & Article Info
down arrowReferences

Ottawa General Hospital; Ottawa, Ontario K1H 8L6, Canada


References
space
up arrowTop
up arrowAuthor & Article Info
dotReferences

1. Lalezari JP, Stagg RJ, Kuppermann BD, Holland GN, Kramer F, Ives DV, et al. Intravenous cidofovir for peripheral cytomegalovirus retinitis in patients with AIDS. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1997; 126:257-63.

2. Studies of Ocular Complications of AIDS Research Group in Collaboration with the AIDS Clinical Trial Group. Parenteral cidofovir for cytomegalovirus retinitis in patients with AIDS: the HPMPC Peripheral Cytomegalovirus Retinitis Trial. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1997; 126:264-74.

3. Collaborative DHPG Study Group. Treatment of serious cytomegalovirus infections with 9-(1,3-dihydroxy-2-propoxymethyl) guanine in patients with AIDS and other immunodeficiencies. N Engl J Med. 1986; 314:801-5.

4. Studies of Ocular Complications of AIDS Research Group, in collaboration with the AIDS Clinical Trial Group. Mortality in patients with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome treated with either ganciclovir or foscarnet for cytomegalovirus retinitis. N Engl J Med. 1992; 326:213-20.[Abstract]

About Letters
space

The Editors welcome submissions for possible publication in the Letters section. Authors of letters should:

•Include no more than 300 words of text, three authors, and five references

•Type with double-spacing

•Send three copies of the letter, an authors' form signed by all authors, and a cover letter describing any conflicts of interest related to the contents of the letter.

Letters commenting on an Annals article will be considered if they are received within 6 weeks of the time the article was published. Only some of the letters received can be published. Published letters are edited and may be shortened; tables and figures are included only selectively. Authors will be notified that the letter has been received. If the letter is selected for publication, the author will be notified about 3 weeks before the publication date. Unpublished letters cannot be returned.

Annals welcomes electronically submitted letters.





box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
Articles in PubMed by Author:
  arrow  Kravcik, S.
space
 arrow  Related Articles in PubMed
space
 arrow  PubMed Citation
space
 arrow  PubMed
space


 Home | Current Issue | Past Issues | In the Clinic | ACP Journal Club | CME | Collections | Audio/Video | Mobile | Subscribe | Tools | Help | ACP Online