4.5 Review

CNS Neurotoxicity of Antiretrovirals

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROIMMUNE PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 16, Issue 1, Pages 130-143

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11481-019-09886-7

Keywords

Antiretroviral; Neurotoxicity; HAND; Neurocognitive; HIV; Antiretroviral therapy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The development of novel antiretroviral treatments has marked a significant turning point in the battle against HIV, but HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder (HAND) remains prevalent. Research has explored the neurotoxic effects of these medications, raising questions about their impact on neurocognitive and neuropsychiatric function in HIV patients, while also discussing the concept of accelerated aging and potential treatments for HAND in HIV-positive individuals.
The development of novel antiretroviral treatments has led to a significant turning point in the fight against HIV. Although therapy leads to virologic suppression and prolonged life expectancies, HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder (HAND) remains prevalent. While various hypotheses have been proposed to explain this phenomenon, a growing body of literature explores the neurotoxic effects of antiretroviral therapy. Research to date brings into question the potential role of such medications in neurocognitive and neuropsychiatric impairment seen in HIV-positive patients. This review highlights recent findings and controversies in cellular, molecular, and clinical neurotoxicity of antiretrovirals. It explores the pathogenesis of such toxicity and relates it to clinical manifestations in each medication class. The concept of accelerated aging in persons living with HIV (PLWH) as well as potential treatments for HAND are also discussed. Ultimately, this article hopes to educate clinicians and basic scientists about the neurotoxic effects of antiretrovirals and spur future scientific investigation into this important topic.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available