Search

Background: In the US, 1.2 million people live with HIV (PWH). Despite having near-normal life expectancies due to antiretroviral therapy (ART), many PWH seek an HIV cure, even if it means risking their lives. This willingness to take risks for a cure raises questions about "affective forecasting biases," where people tend to overestimate the positive impact of future events on their well-being. We conducted a study to test two interventions to mitigate affective forecasting in the decisions of PWH about taking HIV cure medication., Methods: We recruited PWH to complete a 30-minute survey about their current quality of life (QoL) and the QoL they anticipate after being cured of HIV, and assigned them to either no additional intervention, to one of two interventions intended to reduce affective forecasting bias, or to both interventions: (1) a defocusing intervention designed to broaden the number of life domains people consider when imagining life changes associated with new circumstances (e.g. HIV cure); and (2) an adaptation intervention to help them gauge fading of strong emotions over time. The study design included a 2 × 2 design: defocusing (yes/no) x adaptation (yes/no) intervention. We assessed PWH's willingness to take hypothetical HIV sterilizing cure medication using the Time Trade-Off (TTO) and their quality of life predictions with WHOQOL-HIV., Results: 296 PWH participated. Counter to what we had hypothesized, neither intervention significantly reduced PWH's willingness to trade time for a cure. Instead, the defocusing intervention increased their willingness to trade time (IRR 1.77, p = 0.03). Exploratory analysis revealed that PWH with lower current quality of life who received the defocusing intervention were more willing to trade time for a cure., Conclusion: These negative findings suggest that either these biases are difficult to overcome in the settings of HIV curative medication or other factors beyond affective forecasting biases influence willingness to participate in HIV curative studies, such as respondents' current quality of life., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Participation in longitudinal research studies in resource-limited settings often involves frequent interactions with study staff and other participants, as well as receipt of incentives and transportation reimbursements. Social support-receipt of material and emotional resources from one's social network-has been linked to antiretroviral adherence in sub-Saharan Africa. The extent to which social support arises from study participation, its range and depth, and its implications for observational study conduct, have not been extensively described., Methods: We conducted individual open-ended and semi-structured interviews with participants in a longitudinal, observational antiretroviral therapy adherence monitoring study in Mbarara, Uganda. Participants were asked about their experiences in the longitudinal study and their interactions with research staff. We also interviewed study research assistants (RAs). Deductive and inductive coding were used to identify content related to the experience of study participation. Codes were organized into themes, and relationships between themes were used to develop overarching categories., Results: Sixty longitudinal study participants and 6 RAs were interviewed. Instrumental and emotional social support emerged as pervasive and valued aspects of longitudinal study participation. Instrumental support that participants received consisted of enhanced linkage to medical care, health education, and direct and indirect material benefits. Emotional support consisted of perceptions of feeling "cared for" and social interactions that permitted escape from HIV-related stigma. Both instrumental and emotional support often arose through the close relationships participants formed with research staff and with each other. Study-derived social support motivated some participants to adhere to antiretroviral therapy-an unanticipated effect potentially influencing the longitudinal study's primary observational outcome., Conclusions: Longitudinal study participation resulted in instrumental and emotional social support for participants. The depth of support participants experienced has implications for observational study design in resource-limited settings, including need to assess potential effects on study outcomes; consideration of social support during risk/benefit assessment in study ethics review and consent; and vigilance for consequences of social support loss when studies end., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

HIV status disclosure remains one of the major challenges to effective HIV prevention. Given the complexities and low rates of disclosure, new innovative strategies are needed. Since electronic adherence monitoring (EAM) are unique mobile devices that light up when transmitting data, those who see them often want to know more about them, which can potentially result in HIV status disclosure. We conducted a qualitative study to explore patient experiences with EAM for antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Uganda with a goal of understanding potential ethical concerns, including disclosure. Unexpectedly, several participants reported intentionally using EAM to facilitate HIV status disclosure to others in order to get social support, encourage HIV testing, and create awareness about HIV. Although researchers and clinicians need to be mindful of the potential for unintended HIV status disclosure through the use of EAM, they should also recognize the potential of this approach to support intended disclosure.

Many people living with HIV (PLWHIV) state that they would be willing to take significant risks to be "cured" of the virus. However, how they interpret the word "cure" in this context is not clear. We used a randomized survey to examine whether PLWHIV had a different willingness to take a hypothetical HIV medication if it causes flu-like symptoms, but provides: (a) cure, (b) remission that was labeled "cure", or (c) remission. PLWHIV (n = 454) were more willing to take a medication that provided a "cure" versus a "remission" if the side effects lasted less than 1 year. PLWHIV were more willing to take a medication that provided a remission that was labeled "cure" versus a "remission" (p = 0.01) if the side effects lasted 2 weeks. Clinicians and researchers should be aware of the impact of the word "cure" and ensure that PLWHIV fully understand the possible outcomes of their treatment options.

Despite doing well on antiretroviral therapy, many people living with HIV have expressed a willingness to accept substantial risks for an HIV cure. To date, few studies have assessed the specific quantitative maximal risk that future participants might take; probed whether, according to future participants, the risk can be offset by the benefits; and examined whether taking substantial risk is a reasonable decision. In this qualitative study, we interviewed 22 people living with HIV and used standard gamble methodology to assess the maximum chance of death a person would risk for an HIV cure. We probed participants' reasoning behind their risk-taking responses. Conventional inductive content analysis was used to categorize key themes regarding decision-making. We found that some people would be willing to risk even death for an HIV cure, and some of their reasons were plausible and went far beyond the health-related utility of an HIV cure. We contend that people's expressed willingness to take substantial risk for an HIV cure should not be dismissed out of hand., (© 2019 by The Hastings Center. All rights reserved.)

Till Bärnighausen points out the medical risks that two categories of contemporary HIV prevention trials, for "treatment-as-prevention" and for "pre-exposure prophylaxis," pose to people who are not study participants. Bärnighausen's compelling case forces reconsideration of the absence of bystanders in the law governing ethical review of health research. It raises the intriguing question: to what legal protection are bystanders morally entitled? The remedy might seem to be to accord bystanders the rights and protections currently accorded to human study participants. We counsel against that remedy on three grounds, inviting colleagues to suggest alternatives.

Ethical guidelines and recommendations for human subjects research typically focus on protecting the individuals who directly participate in that research. However, additional people, including sex partners of research participants, can also face harms and burdens from medical studies. In human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) cure-related research, a persistent ethical and practical challenge surrounds the use of analytical antiretroviral treatment interruptions. The challenge is usually discussed in relation to risks to study participants, but serious dangers accrue to nonparticipants, including sex partners of study participants. This multidisciplinary supplement relays the risks for nonparticipating sex partners in HIV cure-related studies and addresses the ethical dilemmas raised by these studies, with recommendations for researchers, advocates, sponsors, and oversight bodies., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Some HIV remission studies include a treatment interruption that seriously risks infecting participants' sex partners with HIV. What, ethically, is owed to these nonparticipants? Until greater certainty emerges on what protections should be afforded nonparticipants of research studies, what I call a "low-hanging fruit" approach may help researchers and review bodies determine how to address infection risks to nonparticipants in these studies., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

This commentary considers an extreme idea for protecting against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission to sex partners of individuals participating in HIV remission studies with an analytical treatment interruption (ATI). Other human challenge studies, such as studies of influenza, commonly isolate participants during the trial, to protect their contacts and the community against infection. Why should HIV studies with a treatment interruption be any different, one might wonder? This article concludes that isolation should not be used in HIV remission studies with an ATI but also shows that the matter is complex., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Only a few of the recommendations made in this supplement are implemented in ongoing HIV remission studies that involve an analytical treatment interruption. The absence of these recommendations in protocols puts sexual partners of study participants at serious risk. This paper addresses one possible barrier to implementation: a certain misunderstanding among sponsors and research entities., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Background: Widely expected cuts to budgets for global HIV/AIDS response force hard prioritization choices., Setting: We examine policies for antiretroviral therapy (ART) eligibility through the lens of the most relevant ethical approaches., Methods: We compare earlier ART eligibility to later ART eligibility in terms of saving the most lives, life-years, and quality-adjusted life-years, special consideration for the sickest, special consideration for those who stand to benefit the most, special consideration for recipients' own health needs, and special consideration to avoid denying ART permanently., Results: We argue that, in most low- and middle-income countries with generalized HIV/AIDS epidemic, ethically, ART for sicker patients should come before ART eligibility for healthier ones immediately on diagnosis (namely, before "universal test and treat"). In particular, reserving all ART for sicker patients would usually save more life-years, prioritize the sickest, and display other properties that some central ethical approaches find important, and that concern none-so ethically, it is "cross-theoretically dominant," as we put it., Conclusions: In most circumstances of depressed financing in low- and middle-income countries with generalized HIV/AIDS epidemic, reserving all ART for sicker patients is more ethical than the current international standard.

Novel monitoring technologies in HIV research, such as electronic adherence monitors (EAMs), have changed the nature of researcher-participant interactions. Yet little is known about how EAMs and the resulting interaction between researchers and participants affect research participation and the data gathered. We interviewed participants and research assistants (RAs) in an observational cohort study involving EAMs for HIV antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Uganda. We qualitatively explored interviewees' views about ethical issues surrounding EAMs and assessed data with conventional and directed content analysis. Participants valued their relationships with RAs and were preoccupied with RAs' perceptions of them. Participants were pleased when the EAM revealed regular adherence, and annoyed when it revealed non-adherence that contradicted self-reported pill-taking behavior. For many, the desire to maintain a good impression incentivized adherence. But some sought to creatively conceal non-adherence, or refused to use the EAM to avoid revealing non-adherence to RAs. These findings show that participants' perceptions of the study staff's perceptions of them affected the experience of being monitored, study participation, and ultimately the data gathered in the study. Investigators in monitoring-based research should be aware that social interactions between participants and study staff could affect both the practical and ethical conduct of that research.

Despite global progress in HIV stigma reduction, persistent HIV stigma thwarts effective HIV service delivery. Advances in HIV biomedical research toward a cure may shift perceptions of people living with HIV and HIV stigma. The purpose of this study was to examine how men who have sex with men (MSM) living with HIV in Guangzhou, China perceive HIV cure research and its potential impact on MSM and HIV stigma. We conducted in-depth interviews with 26 MSM living with HIV about their perceptions of HIV cure research and the potential impact of an HIV cure on their lives. Thematic coding was used to identify themes and structure the analysis. Two overarching themes emerged. First, participants stated that an HIV cure may have a limited impact on MSM-related stigma. Men noted that most stigma toward MSM was linked to stereotypes of promiscuity and high rates of sexual transmitted diseases in the MSM community and might persist even after a cure. Second, participants believed that an HIV cure could substantially reduce enacted, anticipated, and internalized stigma associated with HIV. These findings suggest that a biomedical cure alone would not remove the layered stigma facing MSM living with HIV. Comprehensive measures to reduce stigma are needed.

Many new technologies monitor patients' and study participants' medical adherence. Some have cautioned that these devices transgress personal autonomy and ethics. But do they? This qualitative study explored how Ugandan study participants perceive the effect of electronic monitoring of their adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) on their freedoms to be non-adherent and pursue other activities that monitoring may inadvertently expose. Between August 2014 and June 2015, we interviewed 60 Ugandans living with HIV and enrolled in the Uganda AIDS Rural Treatment Outcomes (UARTO) study, a longitudinal, observational study involving electronic adherence monitors (EAMs) to assess ART adherence. We also interviewed 6 UARTO research assistants. Both direct and indirect content analysis were used to interpret interview transcripts. We found that monitoring created a sense of pressure to adhere to ART, which some participants described as "forcing" them to adhere. However, even participants who felt that monitoring forced them to take medications perceived using the EAM as conducive to their fundamental goal of high ART adherence. Overall, even if monitoring may have limited participants' effective freedom to be non-adherent, participants welcomed any such effect. No participant rejected the EAM on the grounds that it would limit that effective freedom. Reports that monitoring altered behaviors unrelated to pill-taking were rare. Researchers should continue to be vigilant about the ways in which behavioral health monitoring affects autonomy, but should also recognize that even autonomy-limiting monitoring strategies may enable participants to achieve their own goals.

Purpose of Review: Several promising experimental pathways exist for long-term control of HIV in the absence of antiretroviral therapy (HIV 'remission') and are now being tested in early clinical studies. These studies can be invasive and pose a host of distinctive risks to participants, as well as to nonparticipants, especially to participants' fetuses, and sexual partners., Recent Findings: Ethical analyses of these studies have mainly focused on the risks to study participants. They recommend, and some investigators implement, procedures to mitigate risks for participants or to offset them with direct, indirect, and nonmedical benefits. They also suggest ways to keep participants' consent highly voluntary and informed. Rarely do ethicists propose keeping the social value of studies high. Of these recommended responses, only the latter, rarer proposals help address the risk to nonparticipants, as would some novel ways to address that risk., Summary: HIV remission studies pose a number of ethical dilemmas. Many current investigative approaches put the participant at significant risk, but well established guidelines exist for mitigating this risk. Ethical issues that are not being fully addressed include risk to nonparticipants and the need to consider the societal value of studies, for example, their prospective impact on the global HIV burden. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

With the expansion of antiretroviral treatment programmes, many children and adolescents with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa could expect to live healthy lives. Yet adolescents have the highest levels of poor antiretroviral adherence and of loss to follow-up compared with other age groups. This can lead to increased morbidity and mortality, to the development of drug-resistant strains, and to high societal costs. While financial incentives have been extensively used to promote medication adherence among adults, their use among adolescents remains rare. And while there is a large body of ethical literature exploring financial incentives among adults, little philosophical thought has gone into their use among adolescents. This paper explores three oft-mentioned ethical worries about financial incentives for health behaviours and it asks whether these concerns are more serious in the context of incentives for improving adolescent adherence. The three worries are that such incentives would unduly coerce adolescents' decision-making, would compromise distributive justice and would crowd out intrinsic motivations and non-monetary values. Our tentative conclusion is that more empirical investigation of these concerns is necessary, and that at this point they are not compelling enough to rule out trials in which adolescents are incentivised for antiretroviral adherence., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

This is an afterword to the JME symposium on the benefit/risk ratio challenge in clinical research, and the case of HIV cure. It notes implications of the symposium for research ethics in general., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

This piece introduces the JME symposium 'The benefit/risk ratio challenge in clinical research, and the case of HIV cure.', Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Antiretroviral therapy is not curative. Given the challenges in providing lifelong therapy to a global population of more than 35 million people living with HIV, there is intense interest in developing a cure for HIV infection. The International AIDS Society convened a group of international experts to develop a scientific strategy for research towards an HIV cure. This Perspective summarizes the group's strategy.

Till Bärnighausen and colleagues respond to comments by the HPTN 071 (PopART) Study Team, noting the distinction between the different HIV prevention questions the trial will attempt to answer.

This article lays out a wide spectrum of candidate ethical solutions for the challenge on which this JME symposium focuses: the benefit:risk ratio challenge to some early-phase HIV cure and remission studies. These candidate solutions fall into four categories: ones that seek to reduce risks in early-phase HIV cure and remission studies, ones that enhance the benefits for these studies' participants (or show that those were adequate in the first place), ones that focus on participants' free and informed consent to participate and ones according to whom the large benefits to non-participants can defeat considerations about individual participant net risks. In so doing, this article also structures the rest of the symposium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This response to Gail Henderson et al argues that they were right that interviewees' appraisals of cure study participation should inform (future) protocol review decisions, but wrong to take these appraisals at face value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]