Suchergebnisse

BackgroundAfter rapid scaling up of antiretroviral therapy in HIV‐1‐infected patients, the data of primary HIV‐1 drug resistance in Thailand is still limited. This study aims to determine the prevalence and associated factors of primary HIV‐1 drug resistance in Thailand.MethodsA prospective observational study was conducted among antiretroviral‐naïve HIV‐1‐infected Thai patients from 2007 to 2010. HIV‐1 subtypes and mutations were assayed by sequencing a region of HIV‐1 pol gene. Surveillance drug resistance mutations recommended by the World Health Organization for surveillance of transmitted HIV‐1 drug resistance in 2009 were used in all analyses. Primary HIV‐1 drug resistance was defined as the presence of one or more surveillance drug resistance mutations.ResultsOf 466 patients with a mean age of 38.8 years, 58.6% were males. Risks of HIV‐1 infection included heterosexual (77.7%), homosexual (16.7%), and intravenous drug use (5.6%). Median (IQR) CD4 cell count and HIV‐1 RNA were 176 (42‐317) cells/mm3and 68,600 (19,515‐220,330) copies/mL, respectively. HIV‐1 subtypes were CRF01_AE (86.9%), B (8.6) and other recombinants (4.5%). The prevalence of primary HIV‐1 drug resistance was 4.9%; most of these (73.9%) had surveillance drug resistance mutations to only one class of antiretroviral drugs. The prevalence of patients with NRTI, NNRTI, and PI surveillance drug resistance mutations was 1.9%, 2.8% and 1.7%, respectively. From logistic regression analysis, there was no factor significantly associated with primary HIV‐1 drug resistance. There was a trend toward higher prevalence in females [odds ratio 2.18; 95% confidence interval 0.896‐5.304; p = 0.086].ConclusionsThere is a significant emergence of primary HIV‐1 drug resistance in Thailand after rapid scaling up of antiretroviral therapy. Although HIV‐1 genotyping prior to antiretroviral therapy initiation is not routinely recommended in Thailand, our results raise concerns about the risk of early treatment failure in patients with primary HIV‐1 drug resistance. Interventions to prevent the transmission of HIV‐1 drug resistance and continuation of surveillance for primary HIV‐1 drug resistance in Thailand are indicated.

Globally violence against women is a systemic and widespread problem. Despite the recognition of such violence as a violation of human rights, its numerous manifestations and increasing prevalence rates are a source of concern. The mandate of the United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences has over the eighteen years of its existence examined the phenomena both conceptually and in practice, through thematic reports and country mission reports, respectively. This article focuses on 4 aspects of violence against women. (1) It provides an overview of the evolution of violence against women as a human rights issue. (2) It examines the different manifestations of violence against women. (3) It examines the interpretation by States of their obligation to exercise due diligence in responding to and preventing violence against women. (4) It proposes a holistic approach to dealing with the issue of Violence against Women.

This article highlights a major source of tension between the Supplementary Protocol of the Economic Community of West Africa States Community Court of Justice (ECOWAS CCJ) and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (CFRN), in relation to the enforcement of economic, social and cultural (ESC) rights against Nigeria, as manifested in a recent decision of the ECOWAS CCJ in Registered Trustees of the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v Federal Republic of Nigeria and Universal Basic Education Commission. The focus of this article on the tension is both from the perspective of Nigerian law and of the ECOWAS CCJ. It argues that while the CFRN cannot deprive the ECOWAS CCJ of the jurisdiction expressly given to it by its Protocols, the CFRN does have implications for the enforcement of any decision of the ECOWAS CCJ that offends its provisions within the CFRN sphere of superiority.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has made an increasing number of key decisions concerning domestic violence, of which Kalucza v Hungary is the most recent. It is the first case that addresses the nature of the human rights obligations in circumstances where it is alleged that both parties to a domestic dispute are engaged in acts of unlawful physical violence. It also considers the requirement for swift decision-making where restraining orders are sought against violent partners. The requirement to give sufficient reasons when decisions pertaining to restraining orders is also evaluated. In addition, the judgment considers the duty to determine cases pertaining to the division of the home within a 'reasonable when both parties are residing within it. This article considers the implications of this case, comparing it to other domestic violence cases that have been brought under both Articles 3 and 8.