Search

Introduction: Tenofovir-containing oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is recommended for those at substantial risk as part of combination HIV prevention. However, there are limited data, beyond clinical trial settings, to guide the introduction of PrEP in healthcare services with adequate levels of adherence. Since young women in Africa are at high risk of HIV and likely to utilize family planning (FP) services, the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of integrating topical PrEP provision into routine FP services was assessed. Methods: This two-arm, randomized controlled, non-inferiority open-label extension trial was undertaken in urban and rura KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. HIV-negative eligible women (n = 372) from the parent trial (Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (CAPRISA) 004) were randomized to receive tenofovir gel either through intervention (FP clinics, n = 189) or control clinics (CAPRISA research clinics, n = 183). Non-inferiority was predefined as gel use in the intervention clinics would be no more than 20% lower than in the control clinics. Adherence, retention and HIV incidence rates were assessed. Results: Women were enrolled between November 2012 and October 2014, and followed up for 682.3 women-years (mean = 22 months). Baseline characteristics of women in intervention and control clinics were comparable and retention rates were 92.1% and 92.3% respectively. Women in intervention clinics and control clinics returned on average 5.2 (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.7 to 5.7) and 5.7 (CI: 5.2 to 6.2) used gel applicators per month respectively, with a mean difference of -0.47 (CI: -1.16 to 0.21). Per-protocol estimates were on average 5.5 (CI: 5.0 to 6.1) and 5.8 (CI: 5.3 to 6.3) respectively, with a mean difference of -0.25 (CI: -0.98 to 0.48), meeting the non-inferiority criteria. Adherence, based on proportion of reported sex acts covered by two gel doses, was 79.9% (CI: 76.7 to 83.2) in intervention compared with 73.9% (CI: 70.7 to 77.1) in control clinics; mean difference:6.0% (CI: 1.5 to 10.6) (p = 0.009). HIV incidence rates were 3.5 (CI: 1.8 to 6.0) and 3.6 (CI: 1.9 to 6.3) per 100 women-years in intervention and control clinics respectively. Both these incidence rates were lower than the age-standardized rate of 6.2 per 100 women-years (n = 444) in the placebo arm of the parent trial (p = 0.019). Conclusions: Provision of topical PrEP as part of an integrated FP service achieved higher adherence, and was as feasible, acceptable and effective in preventing HIV as provision through a research setting. This provides useful evidence for scale-up of oral PrEP in urban and rural high burden communities. Keywords: HIV prevention; pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP); tenofovir; adherence; integration into family planning services; implementation of PrEP scale-up, 1 | INTRODUCTION The Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (CAPRISA) 004 trial [1] was the first to demonstrate that antiretroviral drugs used vaginally before and [...]

Passive immunization with broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) is a promising approach to reduce the 1.7 million annual human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections globally. Early studies on bnAbs showed safety in humans, but short elimination half-lives and low potency and breadth. Since 2010, several new highly potent bnAbs have been assessed in clinical trials alone or in combination for HIV prevention. Published data indicate that these bnAbs are safe and have a half-life ranging from 15 to 71 days. Only intravenous VRC01 has advanced to an efficacy trial, with results expected in late 2020. If bnAbs are shown to be effective in preventing HIV infection, they could fast-track vaccine development as correlates of protection, and contribute as passive immunization to achieving the goal of epidemic control. The purpose of the current review is to describe the current status and provide a synopsis of the available data on bnAbs in clinical trials for HIV prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Disclosure, or open communication, by female microbicide trial participants of their trial participation and use of an investigational HIV prevention drug to a sexual partner may affect participants' trial product usage behavior and contribute to poor adherence. With mixed results from recent microbicide clinical trials being linked to differing participant adherence, insights into the communication dynamics between trial participants and their sexual partners are particularly important. We examined the quantitative association between (1) communication of trial participation to a partner and participant adherence to gel and (2) communication of trial participation to a partner and participant HIV status. An in-depth adherence and product acceptability assessment was administered to the women participating in the CAPRISA 004 trial. Additionally, we collected qualitative data related to communication of trial participation and gel use. Qualitatively, among 165 women who had reported that they had discussed trial participation with others, most (68%) stated that they communicated participation to their sexual partner. Most of the women who had communicated study participation with their partners had received a positive/neutral response from their partner. Some of these women stated that gel use was easy; only a small number said that gel use was difficult. Among women who did not communicate their study participation to their partners, difficulty with gel use was more common and some women stated that they feared communicating their participation. Quantitatively, there was no statistically significant difference in the proportions of women who had communicated study participation to a partner across different adherence levels or HIV status. A deeper knowledge of the dynamics surrounding trial participation communication to male partners will be critical to understanding the spectrum of trial product usage behavior, and ultimately to designing tailored strategies to assist trial participants with product adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Antiretroviral prophylaxis may be a critical strategy to reduce periconception HIV transmission. Maximizing the benefit of periconception pharmacologic HIV risk-reduction requires an understanding of the links between pregnancy and adherence to this prevention strategy. Methods: We assessed study gel adherence among women with pregnancies compared to women without pregnancies enrolled in the CAPRISA 004 phase IIB trial of 1% vaginal tenofovir gel. Pregnancy was assessed with monthly urine tests. Adherence was measured monthly and defined as proportion of sex acts covered by two returned, used applicators based on pre- and post-coital dosing. High adherence was defined as a median adherence score of >80%, that is, more than 80% of sex acts were covered by two applications of study gel. A multivariate generalized estimating equations (GEE) model with a binomial distribution was used to assess covariates associated with high adherence (>80%) over time. Median adherence before and after pregnancy was compared using Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: Among 868 women, 53 had at least 1 pregnancy (4.06 per 100 woman years, 95% CI: 3.04, 5.31). Women with pregnancies had lower median adherence compared to women without pregnancies (50% [IQR: 45–83] vs. 60% [IQR: 50–100], p = 0.02). Women with pregnancies also had a 48% lower odds of high adherence compared to women without pregnancies when adjusting for confounders (aOR 0.52, 95%CI: 0.41–0.66, p<0.0001). Among women with pregnancies, adherence before and after pregnancy was not different (50% [IQR: 46–83] vs. 55% [IQR: 20–100], p = 0.68). Conclusions: Women with pregnancies were less likely to have high adherence to study gel compared to women without pregnancies. Understanding these differences may inform findings from HIV prevention trials and future implementation of antiretroviral prophylaxis for at-risk women who choose to conceive. The protocol for the parent trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00441298, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00441298. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: In settings where multiple HIV prevention trials are conducted in close proximity, trial participants may attempt to enroll in more than one trial simultaneously. Co-enrollment impacts on participant''s safety and validity of trial results. We describe our experience, remedial action taken, inter-organizational collaboration and lessons learnt following the identification of co-enrolled participants. Experiences: Between February and April 2008, we identified 185 of the 398 enrolled participants as ineligible. In violation of the study protocol exclusion criteria, there was simultaneous enrollment in another HIV prevention trial (ineligible co-enrolled, n=135), and enrollment of women who had participated in a microbicide trial within the past 12months (ineligible not co-enrolled, n=50). Following a complete audit of all enrolled participants, ineligible participants were discontinued via study exit visits from trial follow-up. Custom-designed education program on co-enrollment impacting on participants'' safety and validity of the trial results was implemented. Shared electronic database between research units was established to enable verification of each volunteer''s trial participation and to prevent future co-enrollments. Lessons learnt: Interviews with ineligible enrolled women revealed that high-quality care, financial incentives, altruistic motives, preference for sex with gel, wanting to increase their likelihood of receiving active gel, perceived low risk of discovery and peer pressure are the reasons for their enrollment in the CAPRISA 004 trial. Conclusion: Instituting education programs based on the reasons reported by women for seeking enrollment in more than one trial and using a shared central database system to identify co-enrollments have effectively prevented further co-enrollments. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The HIV epidemic has been continuously growing among women, and in some parts of the world, HIV-infected women outnumber men. Women's greater vulnerability to HIV, both biologically and socially, influences their health risk and health outcome. This disparity between sexes has been established for other diseases, for example, autoimmune diseases, malignancies and cardiovascular diseases. Differences in drug effects and treatment outcomes have also been demonstrated. Despite proven sex and gender differences, women continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials, and the absence of gender analyses in published literature is striking. There is a growing advocacy for consideration of women in research, in particular in the HIV field, and gender mainstreaming of policies is increasingly called for. However, these efforts have not translated into improved reporting of sex-disaggregated data and provision of gender analysis in published literature; science editors, as well as publishers, lag behind in this effort. Instructions for authors issued by journals contain many guidelines for good standards of reporting, and a policy on sex-disaggregated data and gender analysis should not be amiss here. It is time for editors and publishers to demonstrate leadership in changing the paradigm in the world of scientific publication. We encourage authors, peer reviewers and fellow editors to lend their support by taking necessary measures to substantially improve reporting of gender analysis. Editors' associations could play an essential role in facilitating a transition to improved standard editorial policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To describe the baseline demographic data, clinical characteristics and HIV-incidence rates of a cohort at high risk for HIV infection in South Africa as well as the challenges experienced in establishing and maintaining the cohort. Methodology/Principle Findings: Between August 2004 and May 2005 a cohort of HIV-uninfected women was established for the CAPRISA 002 Acute Infection Study, a natural history study of HIV-1 subtype C infection. Volunteers were identified through peer-outreach. The cohort was followed monthly to determine HIV infection rates and clinical presentation of early HIV infection. Risk reduction counselling and male and female condoms were provided. After screening 775 individuals, a cohort of 245 uninfected high-risk women was established. HIV-prevalence at screening was 59.6% (95% CI: 55.9% to 62.8%) posing a challenge in accruing HIV-uninfected women. The majority of women (78.8%) were self-identified as sex-workers with a median of 2 clients per day. Most women (95%) reported more than one casual sexual partner in the previous 3 months (excluding clients) and 58.8% reported condom use in their last sexual encounter. Based on laboratory testing, 62.0% had a sexually transmitted infection at baseline. During 390 person-years of follow-up, 28 infections occurred yielding seroincidence rate of 7.2 (95% CI: 4.5 to 9.8) per 100 person-years. Despite the high mobility of this sex worker cohort retention rate after 2 years was 86.1%. High co-morbidity created challenges for ancillary care provision, both in terms of human and financial resources. Conclusions/Significance: Challenges experienced were high baseline HIV-prevalence, lower than anticipated HIVincidence and difficulties retaining participants. Despite challenges, we have successfully accrued this cohort of HIVuninfected women with favourable retention, enabling us to study the natural history of HIV-1 during acute HIV-infection. Our experiences provide lessons for others establishing similar cohorts, which will be key for advancing the vaccine and prevention research agenda in resource-constrained settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sex and gender differences influence the health and wellbeing of men and women. Although studies have drawn attention to observed differences between women and men across diseases, remarkably little research has been pursued to systematically investigate these underlying sex differences. Women continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials, and even in studies in which both men and women participate, systematic analysis of data to identify potential sex-based differences is lacking. Standards for reporting of clinical trials have been established to ensure provision of complete, transparent and critical information. An important step in addressing the gender imbalance would be inclusion of a gender perspective in the next Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guideline revision. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals, as a set of wellrecognized and widely used guidelines for authors and biomedical journals, should similarly emphasize the ethical obligation of authors to present data analyzed by gender as a matter of routine. Journal editors are also promoters of ethical research and adequate standards of reporting, and requirements for inclusion of gender analyses should be integrated into editorial policies as a matter of urgency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]