Showing posts with label iPrEx. Show all posts
Showing posts with label iPrEx. Show all posts

Thursday, August 9, 2012

Interim Guidance for Clinicians Considering the Use of Preexposure Prophylaxis for the Prevention of HIV Infection in Heterosexually Active Adults

via Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report

In the United States, an estimated 48,100 new human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections occurred in 2009 (1). Of these, 27% were in heterosexual men and women who did not inject drugs, and 64% were in men who have sex with men (MSM), including 3% in MSM who inject drugs. In January 2011, following publication of evidence of safety and efficacy of daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg (TDF)/emtricitabine 200 mg (FTC) (Truvada, Gilead Sciences) as antiretroviral preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to reduce the risk for HIV acquisition among MSM in the iPrEx trial, CDC issued interim guidance to make available information and important initial cautions on the use of PrEP in this population.

Those recommendations remain valid for MSM, including MSM who also have sex with women (2). Since January 2011, data from studies of PrEP among heterosexual men and women have become available, and on July 16, 2012, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a label indication for reduction of risk for sexual acquisition of HIV infection among adults, including both heterosexuals and MSM.* This interim guidance includes consideration of the new information and addresses pregnancy and safety issues for heterosexually active adults at very high risk for sexual HIV acquisition that were not discussed in the previous interim guidance for the use of PrEP in MSM.

Read the rest.


-------------------
*Join IRMA's robust, highly-active. moderated, global listserv addressing rectal microbicide research and advocacy as well as other interesting new HIV prevention technologies by contacting us at rectalmicro@gmail.com. Joining our listserv automatically makes you a member of IRMA - a network of more than 1,100 advocates, scientists, policy makers and funders from all over the world.

*Please look for us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/InternationalRectalMicrobicideAdvocates, and you can follow us on Twitter: @rectalmicro.

*Also, please note that shared news items from other sources posted on this blog do not necessarily mean IRMA has taken any position on the article's content.
-------------------

Monday, July 16, 2012

Meet Pedro - A Friendly Rectal Microbicide Advocate

Check out this interesting mini-bio of Pedro Goicochea, the latest in IRMA's "Meet a Friendly Rectal Microbicide Advocate" series on the IRMA website here.  Pedro is one of six new bios just posted today, including individuals from Kenya,Thailand and the US.  Each will be featured on the blog, and you can read all of them here right now.




Pedro Goicochea
San Francisco, California

"It took us more than 30 years to realize that there is not one unique strategy to prevent HIV acquisition, and that combination prevention is key, and rectal microbicides must be part of the prevention toolbox."

Originally from Lima, Peru, Pedro is in charge of communications and community relations for the iPrEx OLE study, the open-label continuation of the iPrEx trial. iPrEx is the study that showed daily oral use of the ARV drug Truvada among gay men, other men who have sex with men (MSM), and transgender women worked to prevent HIV.

He enjoys his work because of the invaluable opportunities it provides for him to meet interesting people who are working really hard on finding ways to stop this epidemic. He takes pride in the sensitivity his team shows to community members and for highlighting their needs with scientists and stakeholders. Besides iPrEx OLE, Pedro also just finished a couple of other projects related to the feasibility of voluntary circumcision for HIV prevention in gay men and other MSM, and neonatal male circumcision for HIV prevention, in the jungles of Peru.

In his spare time Pedro loves to ride his bike. He enjoys "having destinations that I reach through the effort of pedaling." Pedro's biggest life influence was his mother, but he is also blessed to be surrounded by excellent people that have been an inspiration. In addition, he has lost several friends to HIV and this motivated him to do something about it.

He was introduced to rectal microbicides and IRMA when he met IRMA chair Jim Pickett through IRMA steering committee member and IRMA-ALC co-founder Jerome Galea. He believes that any strategy to help end the epidemic is useful and thinks that rectal microbicides are an important prevention technology because anal sex is the primary mode of HIV transmission among gay men and other MSM, and that women practice anal sex more than is reported or fully understood.

Pedro has played an important role on the soon-to-be-released IRMA video ("The Rectal Revolution is Here: An Introduction to Rectal Microbicide Clinical Trials") being developed in partnership with the Microbicide Trials Network and Population Council. He is part of the team's Video Advisory Committee and has provided invaluable feedback on content and messaging. He also worked closely on the focus groups (especially those conducted in Lima, Peru) which were designed and implemented to test the "rough cut" of the video with different populations to help ensure the proper messages are coming through. He says it has been a very inspirational expereince and he is really looking forward to see the final release. IRMA plans to release the final version of the video in early September, 2012.

Thanks Pedro, for all that you do!


-------------------
*Join IRMA's robust, highly-active. moderated, global listserv addressing rectal microbicide research and advocacy as well as other interesting new HIV prevention technologies by contacting us at rectalmicro@gmail.com. Joining our listserv automatically makes you a member of IRMA - a network of more than 1,100 advocates, scientists, policy makers and funders from all over the world.

*Please look for us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/InternationalRectalMicrobicideAdvocates, and you can follow us on Twitter: @rectalmicro.

*Also, please note that shared news items from other sources posted on this blog do not necessarily mean IRMA has taken any position on the article's content.
-------------------

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Meet Ariel - A Friendly Rectal Microbicide Advocate from the United States

Check out this interesting min-bio of Ariel Watriss, the latest in IRMA's "Meet a Friendly Rectal Microbicide Advocate" series on the IRMA website here.  Ariel is one of six new bios just posted a few days ago, including individuals from Kenya, Thailand, the UK, India and Argentina.  Each will be featured on the blog, and you can read all of them here right now.

 

Ariel Watriss
Boston, Massachusetts, United States

"Rectal mircrobicides will help allow people take ownership of their sexual health and in the process empower them."

Ariel is a nurse practitioner certified in both adult primary care and women's health, and currently works at the biomedical research team at the Fenway Institute at Fenway Community Health Center. Sexual health is Ariel's professional passion, and she loves discussing awareness, ownership, and knowledge of her clients' sexual selves. Outside of working, Ariel enjoys reading, spending time with her friends and family, and cycling.

Ariel first became aware of IRMA through her current position at Fenway. She worked on multiple biomedical study teams and Microbicide Trials Network studies, where she was first introduced to the amazing world of microbicides. She works on HIV prevention studies looking at HIV vaccines (HVTN 505), PrEP (iPrEx OLE, and the upcoming HPTN 069) and a vaginal ring study looking at vaginal microbicide use (MTN 013/IPM 026).

Ariel believes microbicides are important among new HIV prevention technologies because they are applicable to real world users. "Offering a prevention measure in a product that is already used, such as lubricant, is so awesome. As a prevention tool, they are accessible and engage people in a direct, yet nonthreatening way."

Ariel's advice for IRMA is to continue to advocate and educate. All of IRMA's work is so important to help HIV prevention measures evolve and grow.

Inspiration and influence for Ariel comes from the people (patients, participants, etc.) who she has had a moment of connection and learning with around their sexual health. Ariel learns from teaching all the time, and continues to be inspired by others' learning.

Ariel is also one of the study clinicians in the upcoming MTN 017 trial (the world's first Phase II rectal microbicide trial), and will be working directly with participants in the study.

Thanks Ariel for all that you do!


-------------------
*Join IRMA's robust, highly-active. moderated, global listserv addressing rectal microbicide research and advocacy as well as other interesting new HIV prevention technologies by contacting us at rectalmicro@gmail.com. Joining our listserv automatically makes you a member of IRMA - a network of more than 1,100 advocates, scientists, policy makers and funders from all over the world.

*Please look for us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/InternationalRectalMicrobicideAdvocates, and you can follow us on Twitter: @rectalmicro.

*Also, please note that shared news items from other sources posted on this blog do not necessarily mean IRMA has taken any position on the article's content.
-------------------

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

PrEP: time to rethink prevention, effectiveness and ethics?

via Somatosphere, by Marsha Rosengarten

One of the more controversial interventions proposed for HIV prevention in those who test HIV antibody negative and perceived to be at risk is pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) – a daily pill comprising one or two antiretroviral drugs manufactured by Gilead Inc. Besides the mixed results from multi-site randomised controlled trials (RCTs) seeking to establish the efficacy of PrEP (see iPrEX versus Fem-PrEP), concerns have been raised about PrEP’s potential to undermine condom use, its cost implications in locales where treatment provision is still lacking and elsewhere, its potential to cause unwanted drug side-effects as well as possible drug resistance in those it fails to protect.

Nevertheless, continuing new infections and evidence that high adherence produces a strong protective effect are mobilising many public health authorities to devise feasible implementation models.

Most remarkable about the growing interest in PrEP is the exclusion of the social sciences from major forums where this work is taking place. One such example is a two-day forum held in the UK by IAPAC on the dual topics of treatment as prevention (TasP) and PrEP. The only non-biomedical speakers listed on the programme were a psychologist (speaking on adherence), a bioethicist, activists and public health officials linked to various national epidemics.

Indeed it won’t come as a surprise to many to know that despite the millions of dollars to support RCTs for PrEP, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have so far declined to support a substantial programme of social research on PrEP. In fact if we consider the bioethical requirements imposed on the conduct of RCTs for PrEP and other biomedical interventions, there is no ethical requirement for research on the social dimensions of the intervention during or post RCTs. This applies even when RCTs demonstrate candidate efficacy.

Read the Rest.
 
-------------------

*Join IRMA's robust, highly-active. moderated, global listserv addressing rectal microbicide research and advocacy as well as other interesting new HIV prevention technologies by contacting us at rectalmicro@gmail.com. Joining our listserv automatically makes you a member of IRMA - a network of more than 1,100 advocates, scientists, policy makers and funders from all over the world.

*Please look for us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/InternationalRectalMicrobicideAdvocates, and you can follow us on Twitter: @rectalmicro.

*Also, please note that shared news items from other sources posted on this blog do not necessarily mean IRMA has taken any position on the article's content.

-------------------

Friday, June 8, 2012

Characteristics Qualifying Gay Men for Intermittent PrEP

via AllAfrica.com, by Michael Carter

Older, better-educated gay men who use sexual networking sites and have sex outside the context of committed relationships may be appropriate targets for intermittent pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), US research published in the online edition of the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes suggests.

The investigators found that individuals with this profile were more likely to plan their sexual encounters and to have anal sex fewer than three times per week.

“Our study serves to better characterize MSM [men who have sex with men] who may most benefit from event-based intermittent PrEP,” comment the authors.

The iPrEX study involving gay and other MSM showed that PrEP significantly reduced the risk of acquiring infection with HIV.

However, adherence is a major barrier to the success of PrEP. There are also concerns about its cost and potential side-effects. Intermittent dosing has been proposed as a way of overcoming these limitations. A recently published study showed that adherence was also challenging when an intermittent dosing strategy was used.

This treatment strategy involves taking a dose of antiretroviral therapy before a risky sexual encounter, with a second dose taken shortly after.

This strategy will only be suitable for people who engage in risky sex fewer than three times per week, and who plan their sexual encounters.

Investigators in the US wished to establish a better understanding of the characteristics of gay men and other MSM who fulfilled these criteria.

HIV-negative gay men were recruited to the study using social networking sites in late 2010. All were sexually active (defined as anal sex within the previous month). The men supplied demographic data, as well as information about their sexual risk behaviour, how they planned their sexual encounters, their use of sexual networking media and their relationship status.

A total of 1013 men participated in the research. Their median age was 28 years. Most (56%) participants reported that their last anal sex was unprotected.

Read the rest.


-------------------
*Join IRMA's robust, highly-active. moderated, global listserv addressing rectal microbicide research and advocacy as well as other interesting new HIV prevention technologies by contacting us at rectalmicro@gmail.com. Joining our listserv automatically makes you a member of IRMA - a network of more than 1,100 advocates, scientists, policy makers and funders from all over the world.

*Please look for us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/InternationalRectalMicrobicideAdvocates, and you can follow us on Twitter: @rectalmicro.

 *Also, please note that shared news items from other sources posted on this blog do not necessarily mean IRMA has taken any position on the article's content.
-------------------

Thursday, March 8, 2012

CROI 2012: iPrEx Researchers Test Dosage of PrEP

via AidsMap.com, by Gus Cairns

Further testing of drug levels in the blood and immune cells of gay men participating in the iPrEx trial of tenofovir/FTC (Truvada) pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has found that HIV infection in men assigned to Truvada was associated with a lapse in taking the drug after initially adhering reasonably well, rather than never having taken it at all, which was what the researchers originally thought. The research was presented at the 19th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI), in Seattle.

The testing also found that only a minority of participants appeared to be taking their drugs as prescribed, seven days a week, but that protection levels were very high – in the order of 96% of infections prevented – as long as participants took four or more doses a week.

Drug levels plummet three months before infection

The results of iPrEx, a large multi-country study of PrEP in gay men, were announced in 2010 and showed an overall efficacy of 42% – in the trial subjects as a whole, four out of ten HIV infections that would otherwise have happened were prevented if subjects were given Truvada pills to take daily rather than placebo pills. When drug levels were tested in the 48 participants who became HIV-infected on Truvada, and a random sample of uninfected participants, it was found, perhaps not surprisingly, that drug was detectable in only 10% of the infected participants but also, perhaps more surprisingly, in only 50% of the uninfected ones.

New measurements have now looked back at drug levels in stored samples in the months prior to infection and compared with drug levels in the same time period in uninfected participants. In the uninfected participants, consistently 45% or so had detectable drug in their samples across the whole length of the study – confirming that at least half of the participants simply never took their pills. In the infected participants average adherence rates started off the same as in the uninfected. They showed a slight decline in the first year of the trial but then declined to 10% in the three months preceding infection. This suggests a role for quarterly adherence reinforcement.

What levels of tenofovir are protective?

The researchers also wished to find out what levels of tenofovir in the blood were associated with protection against HIV. They did this by comparing drug levels in iPrEx participants with drug levels in a small study called STRAND, presented at last year’s conference (Liu),which gave participants directly-observed doses of tenofovir twice, four time or seven times a week and then measured drug levels in their hair. By then comparing the levels of protection seen in participants with specific drug levels in iPrEx, the researchers were able to compute what drug level was protective.

In iPrEx the average drug levels seen in infected people were consistent with less than one dose of tenofovir a week, but drug levels in those who were not infected were consistent with only about three doses a week. Only 18% of iPrEx participants had drug levels consistent with taking seven doses a week. The investigators used very sensitive tests to look at levels of metabolised tenofovir inside cells and found that a reduction of 90% in the risk of HIV infection correlated with a drug level of 16 femtomols per mol (fm/M – 16 in every million billion molecules by weight). The average level associated with seven doses a week in STRAND was about 38 fm/M and with four doses a week about 32 fm/M.

This enabled them to calculate that the protection offered by taking four doses of tenofovir a week was high, and more or less the same as taking seven doses – that is, in the order of 96%, with a minimum likely protectiveness of 90%. They also calculated that absolutely perfect adherence would offer 99% protection. Taking two doses a week (consistently) would still offer 72% protection, though within wide confidence intervals (56% to 96%) while the 42% level of protection actually seen in iPrEx was consistent with participants taking, on average, one dose a week.

This study has important limitations. STRAND did not measure FTC levels so the iPrEx researchers could not calculate what extra protection was offered by that drug. They also could not measure drug levels at the actual moment of exposure – they were measured at anything between 15 and 90 days after infection. And of course the ‘number of doses a week’ measure is purely an average – most participants probably had much more irregular patterns of taking their pills, with (amongst the 50% who took it at all) periods of good adherence interspersed by periods off drug, maybe correlated with times on and off sex. But it does give a guide to the likely minimum levels of tenofovir that people need to maintain in order to be protected from HIV.



[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

Monday, December 12, 2011

Differing Truvada Drug Levels in Vaginal and Rectal Tissue Offer Clues to HIV PrEP Puzzle

via HIVandHepatitis.com, by Liz Highleyman

The 2 drugs in the Truvada pill -- tenofovir and emtricitabine -- reach different concentrations in human cervical, vaginal, and rectal mucosa tissues and fluids, according to new research published in the December 7, 2011, issue of Science Translational Medicine. Lower drug levels in the female genital tract suggest that women may need higher doses to achieve a prophylactic effect, which may help explain conflicting results from some recent biomedical HIV prevention trials.

A series of large trials over the past 2 years have produced mixed findings about the benefits and risks of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), or use of antiretroviral drugs by HIV negative people in an effort to prevent infection.

The iPrEx study of gay and bisexual men in several countries and the TDF2 trial of heterosexual women and men in Botswana both showed that daily oral tenofovir/emtricitabine dramatically reduced the risk of HIV infection when given along with risk-reduction counseling, free condoms, and other prevention services.

The Partners PrEP trial of serodiscordant heterosexual couples found that both daily tenofovir/emtricitabine and oral tenofovir alone reduced the risk of infection, by 73% and 62%, respectively.

In contrast, the FEM-PrEP trial did not find a prevention benefit of daily oral tenofovir/emtricitabine for heterosexual women in Kenya, South Africa, and Tanzania; that trial was halted this past April after an interim review showed a similar number of new HIV infections in the tenofovir/emtricitabine and placebo arms.

Most recently, the VOICE trial, looking at women in South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe, halted its oral tenofovir monotherapy arm in September after an interim analysis found that the study could not demonstrate that it was more effective than placebo. But another study arm testing tenofovir/emtricitabine was  allowed to continue, suggesting the combination performed better in the interim analysis.

The reasons for these conflicting results are not clear, but researchers have noted that, overall, tenofovir-based PrEP appears to work somewhat better for men than for women, leading some to speculate that the drugs may not behave the same at different anatomical sites.

Kristine Patterson and Myron Cohen from the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill and colleagues designed a study to look at pharmacological properties of tenofovir and emtricitabine in genital and colon-rectal mucosal tissue from 15 healthy HIV negative volunteers, 8 men and 7 women.

Cohen was the principle investigator of the HPTN 052 study -- presented to much fanfare at the International AIDS Society conference this summer in Rome -- which showed that if the HIV positive partner in a serodiscordant couple started immediate ART upon diagnosis regardless of CD4 cell count, the risk of HIV transmission was reduced by 96%; HPTN was mostly conducted in low- and middle-income countries, however, and use of tenofovir/emtricitabine was uncommon (10% overall, but zero at several sites).

Read the rest.


[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Gay Men: PrEP Acceptable and Unlikely to Change Risk Behaviour

Via AIDSMap, by Michael Carter.

Approximately 50% of gay men said they were likely to use pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), but few reported that it would lead to a change in their risk behaviour, according to data presented to the International AIDS Society conference in Rome.

Nevertheless, the investigators were concerned that even minor increases in rates of unprotected anal sex could offset the benefits of pre-exposure prophylaxis.

The IPrEX study showed that PrEP significantly reduced the risk of infection with HIV for gay and bisexual men. Overall, men who took PrEP had their risk of HIV reduced by 44%. If adherence was high, the risk was reduced by 73%.

“PrEP offers much promise as the first biomedical intervention to have success in at-risk men who have sex with men,” comment the researchers.

They therefore undertook further analysis to see how likely the men who participated in the study were to use PrEP and if its availability would change their HIV risk behaviour.

They undertook a survey in December 2010, immediately following the release of the IPrEX results, using Facebook and Black Gay Chat to recruit participants. A total of 1155 gay and other men who have sex with men were recruited to the study.

Participants completed a questionnaire about their knowledge and willingness to use PrEP; perceptions of the risk of HIV infection from unprotected anal sex with or without PrEP; perceptions of sexual pleasure; and perception of likelihood to experience sexual pleasure with or without a condom and with or without PrEP.

The men had an average age of 33 years, 75% were white, and 51% reported unprotected anal sex at least once in the last twelve months.

Only a third of men had heard of PrEP before the release of the study results. Just under half of individuals reported that they were “very” or “extremely” likely to use PrEP.

Unprotected anal sex without a condom was widely considered to involve a high risk of HIV.

The availability of PrEP did not alter the perception of the risk associated with HIV in the majority of men, regardless of whether they were the insertive (75%) or receptive (60%) partner in anal sex.

Three-quarters of men stated that the 44% efficacy of PrEP in the IPrEX study would not affect their use of condoms. However, 7% reported that they would use condoms less frequently.

Read the rest here.

[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

Monday, August 1, 2011

Washington D.C.: Public Meeting on Safety Issues in PrEP

An invitation from the Forum for Collaborative HIV Research:



Safety Issues in Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for HIV negative individuals, proposals for management of safety concerns, and pending plans for scale-up

Forum for Collaborative HIV Research
1608 Rhode Island Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036

August 19, 2011
8:30am - 4:00pm

The Forum for Collaborative HIV Research has been tasked by our collaborators in the public health community, including the US Food and Drug Administration, to convene an open public meeting to address safety issues that may surround the introduction of biomedical approaches to prevent HIV infection. Recent data from the iPrEx, Partners PrEP and CDC’s TDF2 studies support a conclusion that pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with antiretrovirals may be effective at preventing transmission of infection in otherwise healthy, vulnerable individuals upon exposure to HIV. This important finding may lead to scale-up, broad use of PrEP and, potentially, approval of a PrEP indication.

Recently, the drug development paradigm has also shifted with more focus on safeguarding individuals on medications. Premarket studies can miss important safety signals, either because the patient population is different and limited by enrollment criteria, too small to see low incidence events, or exposure is not long enough to identify latent effects. Compensatory behavioral issues may also be a concern upon scale-up. Appropriate communication strategies to reach the intended healthcare provider and the intended vulnerable populations must be identified and formulated. Mechanisms to anticipate and/or control the development of resistant HIV are also important. Finally, public focus as a result of our meeting may identify additional public health issues that should be addressed as well.

The Forum meeting will follow our usual format of panel discussions featuring stakeholders, including academics, trialists, clinicians, community advocates, public health professionals, and others. Each will be asked by a moderator to address a set of pre-prepared questions. Four panels are planned: (1) What are the safety issues of concern with pre-exposure prophylaxis?; (2) what are potential remedies to control safety risks and their pros and cons?; (3) what are the public health implications?; and (4) finally, a panel will summarize and identify next step.

Because of limited space, public participation in the meeting room will be limited to one participant per organization. An overflow room will be available for attendees on an as-needed basis. The meeting will be webcast to enhance national dissemination. Written supplementary questions can be directed to the panels. Webcast attendees can also submit written questions via instant messaging.

Registration: Register online at http://prep-reg.com/ to attend the public meeting or to view the live webcast.
Location: 1608 Rhode Island Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036
Date and Time: August 19, 2011 8:30 AM-4:00 PM

________________________________________
Forum Announcements

Studies show new progress in HIV testing in emergency departments
July 29
A CDC sponsored supplement released in the Annals of Emergency Medicine details new HIV testing efforts in Emergency Departments. "Emergency departments play a critical role in helping people learn their HIV status, connecting them to life-prolonging care, and helping them avoid transmitting the virus to others"said Jonathan Mermin, MD, Director of CDC's Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention. Click here to read more

Controlling the HIV Epidemic - The Promise of ARV-Based Prevention: Presentations now available
July 28
Presentations made at the Forum co-sponsored IAS Satellite Symposium "Controlling the HIV Epidemic - The Promise of ARV-Based Prevention" are now available. Click here to read more

Statistical Methods for Causal Inference in Observational and Randomized Studies: Course fees increase on August 1
7/26/11 This course concerns statistical methods for causal inference using observational and experimental longitudinal data. The course will focus on the application of methodological advances in statistical and causal research to improve the design and interpretation of safety analyses. These analyses will become increasingly important in the post-marketing safety environment for new drugs.

Dates: September 26-28, 2011.
Location: UC Washington Center, Washington, DC.
To register, please use the following link: www.hivforum.org/stats2011

[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

New, Long-Term PrEP Study Announced

Via Now Chelsea, by Sam Spokony.

Few methods of HIV prevention have been as promising, or as controversial, as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). After a history of underground practice and off-label prescriptions, the approach has recently begun to receive serious attention from researchers, policy makers and health care advocates.

An outgrowth of post-exposure prophylaxis (or PEP, a short-term antiretroviral treatment that has been used since the early 90s to decrease the likelihood of HIV infection after exposure to the virus, either occupationally or through sex), PrEP is a similar antiretroviral that can be taken by HIV-negative individuals in order to help prevent them from seroconverting (being infected).

The results of a Phase III clinical study known as iPrEx were published in the New England Journal of Medicine on November 23, 2010. The study showed that, in a group of 2,499 gay men, PrEP — in the form of a combination of drugs under the brand name Truvada — was 44 percent effective in preventing HIV seroconversion.

Under the guidance of Dr. Roy Gulick (director of the Weill Cornell Medical College HIV Clinical Trials Unit), a new experiment called the NEXT (Novel Explorations of Therapeutics) PrEP Study will begin this fall. It will include 400 at-risk, HIV-negative gay men, and will take place over 48 weeks at 12 sites across the U.S. and Puerto Rico.

The NEXT PrEP Study will differ from iPrEx in that its primary experimental group will receive a daily regimen of the drug maraviroc (brand name Selzentry). The control group will receive Truvada, and two other experimental groups will receive combinations of maraviroc and either tenofovir or FTC (the two individual drugs that make up Truvada). A major goal of the study, along with testing the HIV-prevention efficacy of maraviroc, will be to gauge the side effects of the drug on participants.

“The longest any HIV-negative person has taken PrEP in a clinical study is 12 weeks,” Gulick told Chelsea Now in a July 23 phone interview [This is actually a major factual error. For example, the average follow-up in iPrEx was 14 months - IRMA]. “Now, since this is a drug we’re giving to healthy people, the next step is exploring further to prove that it is both safe and tolerable for them.”

Read the rest here.

[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

Thursday, July 21, 2011

IAS 2011: Day 4 Press Release

OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE – DAY 4
16.30 (CET), WEDNESDAY JULY 20

Late Breaker extracts - newsmakers

First global study of real-world circumcision rollout conducted over three-year period in South Africa amongst 110,000 adults shows a marked reduction (>60%) of HIV acquisition among circumcised adult men .

Elvitegravir once-daily is non inferior to raltegravir twice-daily in treatment experienced patients

iPrEx study: new, long-term data from the first large-scale clinical trial to demonstrate the efficacy of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis shows the durability of PrEP for HIV prevention


Wednesday, 20 July, 2011 (Rome, Italy) -- Researchers presenting late breaking research  on the final day of  the 6th IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis, Treatment and Prevention (IAS 2011) have today focussed on new studies in the field of circumcision, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and antiretroviral treatment. The IAS 2011 conference has been attended by over 5000 researchers, clinicians and community leaders since Sunday in Rome.

  • The roll-out of male circumcision in the South African township of Orange Farm (ANRS 12126) is curbing the spread of HIV ( 16.30-17.30, SR2)
B. Auvert1, D. Taljaard2, D. Rech2, P. Lissouba3, B. Singh4, D. Shabangu2, C. Nhlapo5, J. Otchere-Darko2,T. Mashigo2, G. Phatedi2, R. Taljaard2, M. Tsepe2, M. Chakela2, A. Mkhwanazi2, P. Ntshangase2, S. Billy5,D. Lewis4

1Univeristy of Versailles, Versailles, France, 2Progressus, Johannesburg, South Africa, 3Inserm 1018, Villejuif, France, 4NICD-NHLS, Johannesburg, South Africa, 5SFH, Johannesburg, South Africa

Three years after the start of the male circumcision roll-out (ANRS 12126) in the South African township of Orange Farm (110 000 adults), a reduction in HIV prevalence and incidence among men has been observed. These findings demonstrate for the first time that male circumcision roll-out is effective at community level in curbing the spread of HIV. This research is coordinated by Inserm U1018/UVSQ and conducted by Progressus (South Africa), the National Institute of Communicable diseases of the NHLS (South Africa) and is financed by the French National Agency for Research on AIDS and Viral Hepatitis ANRS.

"The real-world effect of the roll-out of medical male circumcision (MMC) on the HIV epidemic has been until today, unknown,” said Professor Bertran Auvert, Professor of Public Health at the University of Versailles and  principal investigator of  the  study.

“This study demonstrates that adult male circumcision works to reduce the spread of HIV in an African community highly affected by the epidemic. Reducing the number of new infections with adult male circumcision will save lives and reduce the need for antiretroviral therapy. This study shows also that the roll out of adult safe male circumcision should become a top health priority in Southern and Eastern Africa and that a strong political commitment is needed now,” concluded Auvert.

  • Completed observation of the randomized placebo-controlled phase of iPrEx: daily oral FTC/TDF pre-exposure HIV prophylaxis among men and trans women who have sex with men (16.30-17.30, SR2)
 R. Grant1,2, V. McMahan1, A. Liu3, J. Guanira4, M. Casapia5, J. Lama4, T. Fernandez6, V. Veloso7, S. Buchbinder3, S. Chariyalertsak8, M. Schechter9, L.-G. Bekker10, K. Mayer11, E. Kallas12, P. Anderson13, K.R. Amico14, D. Glidden2, for the iPrEx Study Team

1Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, United States, 2University of California - San Francisco, San Francisco, United States, 3San Francisco Department of Public Health, San Francisco, United States, 4INMENSA, Lima, Peru, 5ACSA, Iquitos, Peru, 6Equidad, Guayaquil, Ecuador, 7FIOCRUZ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 8RIHES, University of Chiang Mai, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 9Project Praca Onze, Hospital Escola Sao Francisco de Assis, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 10Desmond Tutu HIV Centre, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa, 11Fenway Health, Boston, United States, 12University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 13University of Colorado Denver, Aurora, United States, 14University of Connecticut, Storrs, United States

New research will be presented from investigators of the iPrEx study, the first large-scale clinical trial to demonstrate the efficacy of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) as HIV prevention. Data presented here demonstrate that the HIV prevention impact of PrEP was durable throughout the iPrEx study and across participant subgroups, with no evidence of HIV drug resistance among individuals infected with HIV after starting PrEP and a very low rate of side effects.

"PrEP is an important HIV prevention tool with the potential to prevent significant numbers of new HIV infections," said iPrEx Protocol Chair Robert Grant, investigator at the Gladstone Institute of Virology and Immunology in San Francisco and Associate Professor of Medicine at the University of California.

"These data confirm that PrEP is safe and effective in MSM, one of the populations most affected by HIV worldwide. A four-continent open-label extension of the iPrEx study is underway. Global and national public health experts and advocates should work expeditiously to determine how to best make this lifesaving HIV prevention tool available for MSM, who bear the brunt of the epidemic in many parts of the world, “concluded Grant

  • Results of the Gilead 145 trial: Elvitegravir once-daily is non inferior to raltegravir twice-daily in treatment experienced patients: 48 week results from a phase 3 multicenter, randomized, double blind study (16.30-17.30, SR1)
 J.-M. Molina1, A. LaMarca2, J. Andrade Villanueva3, B. Clotet4, N. Clumeck5, Y.-P. Liu6, L. Zhong6, A. Cheng6, J. Szwarcberg6, S.L. Chuck6, for the Study 145 Group

1Hopital Saint Louis, Paris, France, 2Therafirst Medical Center, Fort Lauderdale, United States, 3HospitalCivil de Guadalajara, CUCS, U de G, Guadalajara, Mexico, 4Hospital Universitario Germans Trias i Pujol, Barcelona, Spain, 5C.H.U. St Pierre, Brussels, Belgium, 6Gilead Sciences, Foster City, United States

This is the first head to head comparison of elvitegravir an investigational once-daily HIV integrase inhibitor to raltegravir, the only approved integrase inhibitor today.

In this international phase III study involving 234 sites in United States, Europe, Canada, Mexico, Australia and Puerto Rico, 702 HIV-infected patients failing their current antiretroviral regimen with drug-resistant viruses, were randomized to receive in a double-blind fashion either once-daily elvitegravir or twice daily raltegravir in combination with a boosted protease inhibitor and a third agent. The primary efficacy endpoint at week 48 demonstrated similar efficacy of the two regimens with a virologic response rate (plasma HIV viral load below 50 copies/ml) of 59 and 58% in the elvitegravir and raltegravir arms, respectively using an intent to treat analysis, with a treatment difference of 1.1% (95% CI : -6.2;8.2).

The safety of the two regimens was also similar with only 2-3% of patients in both arms discontinuing treatment because of adverse events. Finally, the emergence of integrase resistance among patients with virologic failure was only 27% and 21% in the elvitegravir and raltegravir arms, respectively.

Overall, these results demonstrate the efficacy and safety of elvitegravir in combination with a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor for treatment-experienced patients, and position elvitegravir as an alternative once-daily integrase inhibitor. 

“For many people, HIV treatment might just have got simpler,"   said Jean-Michel Molina, the study’s principal investigator and Head  of   the  Department of Infectious Diseases at the  Hopital Saint Louis in Paris. “This  study is good news  for people living with HIV -  pending FDA approval they  will  now have available a new antiretroviral drug that only needs to be taken once a day which in itself will also promote better adherence,” concluded Molina.
[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

Monday, July 18, 2011

Building the momentum to prevent HIV in MSM

Via The Lancet, by Thomas J Coates.

Larry Kramer, on accepting the Tony Award last month from the Theatre Guild-American Theatrical Society for The Normal Heart as Best Revival of a Play said: “To gay people everywhere, whom I love so dearly…we are a very special people, an exceptional people, and…our day will come.” My day came in 1982 when I secured an Assistant Professorship in the Department of Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. I set about establishing a behavioural medicine clinic fully integrated into general medicine practices, researching chronic disease prevention, and teaching interns and residents about psychological issues. One guest speaker, a social worker, led a discussion with the residents about the special medical needs of gay men. He was dead a month later from what later became known as AIDS.

The “special and exceptional people” cited by Kramer had lived through the 1970s and fought for human rights in the USA. That was followed in 1981 with the scourge of AIDS that could have knocked the wind out of the gay community. Instead, the community rallied and used its skills and talents to advocate for resources to develop community-based systems of care and prevention, and to ensure that human rights were not trampled.

Unleashing that energy and skill to build a global movement to improve HIV prevention and care services for men who have sex with men (MSM) is long overdue. Momentum is building and Chris Beyrer and co-authors make an important contribution. The Global HIV Epidemics among Men Who Have Sex with Men documents the extent of the HIV epidemic and outlines what needs to happen to ensure that everything possible is being done to prevent and treat HIV infection in MSM worldwide.

This volume documents the need in terms of the numbers, but also addresses the scenarios in which HIV epidemics among MSM exist in low-income and middle-income countries. The first scenario they describe, characterising the HIV epidemic in most of Latin America, is one in which MSM are the predominant exposure mode for HIV infection in the population. In these countries MSM are ten to over 100 times more likely to have HIV than the general population. By contrast, eastern Europe and central Asia have the highest rates of HIV among injection drug users (IDUs), but MSM are still several times more likely to have HIV than the general population. A different scenario is found in sub-Saharan Africa where HIV is widespread among heterosexuals, but even in these contexts MSM can have two to 20 times higher prevalence of HIV than the general population estimates. South, southeast, and northeast Asia are characterised by epidemics that have equal contributions from MSM, IDUs, and heterosexuals, although MSM are still at least ten times more likely to have HIV than the general population.

The needs come not only from the numbers. Beyrer and his co-authors document well the lack of prevention technologies focused on male-to-male transmission. They note that much effort has been expended on encouraging voluntary HIV counselling, testing, and behavioural interventions to decrease rates of unprotected anal intercourse by encouraging less risky sexual behaviours. Although important, such strategies are probably insufficient to produce immediate or lasting change in HIV transmission. Male circumcision may be effective for reducing acquisition of HIV through anal intercourse but we will never know for sure because of the challenges of conducting a trial to prove efficacy. Antiretroviral-based prophylactic approaches provide the best opportunity for managing HIV among MSM. In the wake of the IPREX, CAPRISA 004, and HPTN 052 trials, it is now time to accelerate efforts to determine if similar benefits can be obtained with rectal use of these or similar compounds. In some countries, like Peru where the epidemic is concentrated in MSM, providing universal access to care with MSM-sensitive services could actually change the overall trajectory of disease spread.

Read the rest here.

[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

Thursday, July 14, 2011

Open-Label Extension of iPrEX HIV PrEP Study Begins at 11 Sites in 6 Countries

Via iPrEX News.

The iPrEx Open-Label Extension Study (iPrEx OLE), the next phase of the first human study to report efficacy results on pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV infection, has begun at clinical trial sites around the world. Approximately 2,000 men and transgender women who have sex with men are expected to participate in the 72-week iPrEx OLE study. Study sites in the United States and South Africa are enrolling participants now, as other study sites finalize the regulatory approval process.

In PrEP, antiretroviral medications that are usually used to treat HIV are taken by uninfected people to reduce their risk of infection. The iPrEx study found that men and transgender women who have sex with men (MSM) who took a single daily tablet containing the HIV medications emtricitabine and tenofovir (FTC/TDF), known commercially as Truvada®, experienced an average of 44% fewer HIV infections than those who received a placebo (blank pill). HIV infection rates in the iPrEx study dropped by 90% among those who used PrEP consistently enough to have detectable drug in the body. The HIV risk reduction benefits of PrEP were in addition to those provided by safer sex counseling, condoms, HIV testing and the detection and treatment of sexually transmitted infections. iPrEx study results were published in the New England Journal of Medicine in November, 2010.

The news of the start of iPrEx OLE follows the announcements by two other major PrEP studies, Partners PrEP and the CDC study in Botswana, known as TDF2, which demonstrated the safety and efficacy of PrEP in heterosexual women and men.

AdvertisementiPrEx OLE is a continuation of the iPrEx study that will collect additional data on PrEP efficacy, safety and adherence. All HIV-negative participants who took part in the original iPrEx study and who wish to participate will receive FTC/TDF for HIV prevention for 72 weeks through iPrEx OLE. No placebo will be used in the Open Label Extension.

"We are in a critical moment in HIV prevention research," said iPrEx Protocol Chair Robert Grant, MD, MPH of the Gladstone Institutes and the University of California at San Francisco. "iPrEx provided the first proof of an important new method of HIV prevention that can help slow the global toll of 2.6 million new HIV infections each year. Partners PrEP and the TDF2 study have now expanded that finding by demonstrating the effectiveness of PrEP in heterosexual women and men. Developing and deploying proven HIV prevention methods -- including PrEP, microbicides, vaginal gels, clean needles, medical male circumcision, early treatment, counseling, testing, condoms and suppressive therapy for pregnant women will all be key to slowing the global epidemic."

Read the rest here.

[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

PrEP Media Round-Up - It Works for Heterosexuals Too!

[UPDATED JULY 18]

The exciting news was announced last week that pre-exposure prophylaxis has been shown to work for heterosexual men and women as well as MSM. This is HUGE for HIV prevention.

Below is a selection of news items and press releases we have collected on the two studies that reported out last week. In the comments feel free to share your reactions to this news.

Washington Post: Two studies show that drugs used to treat AIDS can be used to prevent HIV infection, too

EurekAlert (Microbicide Trials Network): VOICE study will continue as it considers what action to take after results of 2 trials

CDC: CDC Trial and Another Major Study Find PrEP Can Reduce Risk of HIV Infection among Heterosexuals

iPrEX News: Two Major Studies Prove HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Works in Heterosexual Women and Men; Build on iPrEx Data Showing PrEP Reduces HIV Infections in Men Who Have Sex with Men

Wall Street Journal: AIDS Drugs Can Prevent Infection, Studies Show

AIDSMAP: Two major studies show that HIV drugs prevent infection

New Vision: Drugs prevent HIV infection up to 73%

Science Now: Anti-HIV Pills Show Powerful Effect Against AIDS

Reuters: 2-Once-daily AIDS pill can slash HIV infection risk

POZ: PrEP Reduces HIV Risk in Two Major Studies

PlusNews: HIV/AIDS: More proof that PrEP works

New Scientist: One cheap pill protects healthy people from HIV

The Daily Nation: Daily dose of drug ‘lowers risk of HIV infection’

Fit Perez: New Pill Could Prevent HIV

Project Inform: Project Inform urges government action following the positive results of two PrEP studies in heterosexual men and women

[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

Thursday, June 30, 2011

PrEP: Prevention Revolution or Magical Thinking

One of the most exciting developments in the fight against HIV is a recent study that concluded that gay men could significantly reduce their risk of infection by taking an existing anti-HIV medication on a daily basis.


Earlier this month our friends at Feast of Fun and Lifelube hosted a forum in Chicago to discuss the iPrEx study published this winter. It was an energetic and exciting discussion with scientists, advocates, and real people taking the pill on the possibilities and concerns surrounding PrEP. For those too far or too busy to make it, Feast of Fun recorded the forum as a podcast, available for free on their website. Please check out the podcast and share your thoughts on the study.


Keith Green, Marc Felion, Dr. Bob Grant and Fausto Fernós - Forum Hosts and Participants

[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...