ArticleJournal of the International AIDS Society2025
REPRIEVE final results: What does it mean for guidelines in low- and middle-income countries?
Article in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe REPRIEVE study demonstrated significant reductions in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) with pitavastatin among people living with HIV (PWH) with low to moderate cardiovascular risk. Most MACE events occurred in higher-income countries, raising important considerations for similar primary prevention interventions within HIV programmes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) as antiretrovirals become safer and as PWH age. DISCUSSION: Limited data from Africa and within REPRIEVE suggests that MACE may not be as prevalent among PWH as within other geographies. Consequently, there remain questions about the appropriateness of extrapolating REPRIEVE data to the region and whether it should motivate programmatic implementation on the continent. Moreover, glucose and lipid screening used in REPRIEVE raise concerns about additional resources for similar screening, where there is little existing infrastructure and subsequent treatment. Similarly, questions around funding priorities, and health worker resource allocation for MACE prevention, particularly in the context of competing health priorities and limited health financing, need to be addressed. Newer cardiovascular medications, with cardiac, renal, hepatic, diabetes and weight loss benefits, may have greater promise, although cost remains a major concern. Finally, successful implementation with statins or other proven interventions will be unlikely, unless systemic change within non-communicable disease health system delivery programmes occurs first. However, HIV programmes and public health systems more generally have shown themselves to be poor at screening and treating other cardiovascular risk factors, including aspects as simple as raised blood pressure, even in high-income countries, and statins remain grossly under-prescribed for primary and secondary prevention internationally.
conclusionsREPRIEVE turned a spotlight on how ill-prepared current HIV programmes are to implement the simplest and safest primary care prevention interventions for cardiometabolic disease within LMICs. As data for existing and new interventions become available, HIV delivery systems will need to raise their standard beyond simply prescribing antiretrovirals and taking viral loads.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.