An ongoing dialogue on HIV/AIDS, infectious diseases,
December 5th, 2008
New Case Definition for HIV Infection? Yawn …
The CDC has revised its case definition for HIV infection and AIDS, so that now laboratory evidence — a positive antibody test, or detectable HIV RNA or DNA – is required for the diagnosis.
It’s not intended to guide clinical practice, but still — what took them so long? A clinical diagnosis of AIDS was only necessary before HIV had been discovered. I cannot imagine someone reporting a case of AIDS or HIV infection without a positive blood test, especially since there have been several well-publicized cases of erroneous HIV diagnoses when laboratory confirmation was unavailable, or not performed.
So good move here, glad the epidemiologists have caught up. And nostalgists may enjoy reading prior versions of various AIDS case definitions here.
Paul E. Sax, MD
Contributing Editor
NEJM Journal Watch
Infectious Diseases
Biography | Disclosures | Summaries
Learn more about HIV and ID Observations.
NEJM Journal Watch — Recent Infectious Disease Articles- When it Comes to Antimicrobial Stewardship, Is a Boost Better Than a Nudge?
- HIV Prevention and Treatment: Updated Recommendations from the International AIDS Society–USA
- Observations from ID and Beyond: Dr. Thomas O'Brien — Expert in Antimicrobial Resistance and Giant in His Field (Literally)
- How Serious Is Artemisinin Partial Resistance in African Malaria Parasites?
- Observations from ID and Beyond: Who's Going to Get Lenacapavir for HIV Prevention?