Search

MTN-025/HOPE was an open-label trial of the dapivirine vaginal ring conducted in four African countries between 2016 and 2018. Women were first offered one ring monthly (at baseline, months 1 and 2), thereafter, transitioned to a more applicable real-world dispensation schedule, - 3 rings quarterly (at months 3, 6 and 9). Logistic regression analysis was used to assess correlates of ring acceptance at baseline and through follow-up. A total of 1456 women (median age 31 years) enrolled, 1342 (92.2%) accepted the ring at baseline and 1163 (79.9%) accepted the ring(s) at all visits. Changing ring dispensation from a monthly to a quarterly schedule had no negative effect on acceptance. Having a primary partner and him knowing about the ring being offered in HOPE, use of long-acting contraception (implants, injections, IUDs) or sterilization were associated with ring acceptance, along with prior strong intention to use the ring in the future. Efforts should consider these factors when rolling out the ring for HIV prevention., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Objective(s): MTN-020/ASPIRE trial and IPM-027/Ring Study recently proved the dapivirine vaginal ring was safe and effective with consistent use. To optimize the ring's impact, the barriers and facilitators to ring adherence must be understood and addressed., Methods: Former ASPIRE participants were stratified by age group (18-21; 22-45) and randomly selected at seven sites in Malawi, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe, 12-17 months after trial exit. Using in-depth interviews or focus group discussions, ring use barriers were explored using structured guides and visual tools including individual-level depictions of dapivirine levels detected in plasma and returned rings., Results: A total of 187 were enrolled; 37% were 18-21 years when they began ASPIRE. Most (75%) had drug-level results, suggesting inconsistent ring use throughout ASPIRE. Participants viewed themselves as adherent, while simultaneously describing regular instances and reasons for ring removal (e.g. for sex or menses). Less adherent women reported fears that partners would oppose the ring or feel it during sex. High adherers expressed altruistic motivations for ring use. Women of all ages attributed young women's nonadherence to their tendency to be less 'serious' about the future, HIV prevention and the study; motivated predominantly by benefits; more fearful of fertility-related consequences; and to having less relationship control., Conclusion: When presented with objective adherence data, participants provided reasons for intermittent ring use, while simultaneously portraying themselves as consistent ring users. Further research is needed to understand how women could use the ring in a way that fits into the context of their relationships and their lives while still conferring adequate HIV prophylaxis.

Objective: To determine the safety and effectiveness of BufferGel and 0.5% PRO2000 microbicide gels for the prevention of male-to-female HIV transmission., Design: Phase II/IIb, randomized, placebo-controlled trial with three double-blinded gel arms and an open-label no gel arm., Methods: Study participants from Malawi, South Africa, Zambia, Zimbabwe, and the USA were instructed to apply study gel up to 1 h before each sex act and safety, sexual behavior, pregnancy, gel adherence, acceptability, and HIV serostatus were assessed during follow-up., Results: The 3101 enrolled women were followed for an average of 20.4 months with 93.6% retention and 81.1% self-reported gel adherence. Adverse event rates were similar in all study arms. HIV incidence rates in the 0.5% PRO2000 gel, BufferGel, placebo gel, and no gel arms were 2.70, 4.14, 3.91, and 4.02 per 100 women-years, respectively. HIV incidence in the 0.5% PRO2000 gel arm was lower than the placebo gel arm (hazard ratio = 0.7, P = 0.10) and the no gel arm (hazard ratio = 0.67, P = 0.06). HIV incidence rates were similar in the BufferGel and both placebo gel (hazard ratio = 1.10, P = 0.63) and no gel control arms (hazard ratio = 1.05, P = 0.78). HIV incidence was similar in the placebo gel and no gel arms (hazard ratio = 0.97, P = 0.89)., Conclusion: The 0.5% PRO2000 gel demonstrated a modest 30% reduction in HIV acquisition in women. However, these results were not statistically significant and subsequent findings from the Microbicide Development Programme (MDP) 301 trial have confirmed that 0.5% PRO2000 gel has little or no protective effect. BufferGel did not alter the risk of HIV infection. Both products were well tolerated.