Search

Introduction: In 2004, the US government began to utilize the Food and Drug Administration's (USFDA) tentative approval process (tFDA) as a basis to determine which HIV drugs are appropriate to be purchased and used in resource-constrained settings. This process permits products that are not approved for marketing in the US, including medicines with active patents or marketing restrictions in the US, to be purchased and distributed in resource-constrained settings. Although the tFDA was originally intended to support the United States' President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the USFDA list has become a cornerstone of international HIV programmes that support procurement of ARVs, such as the World Health Organization and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. Our objective in this article is to help the global HIV policy makers and implementers of HIV programmes better understand the benefits and limitations of the tFDA by providing an in-depth review of the relevant legal and regulatory processes. Discussion: USFDA's dedicated tFDA process for ARVs used by the PEPFAR programme has a wide impact globally; however, the implementation and the regulatory processes governing the programme have not been thoroughly described in the medical literature. This paper seeks to help stakeholders better understand the legal and regulatory aspects associated with review of ARVs under the tFDA by describing the following: (1) the tFDA and its importance to global ARV procurement; (2) the regulatory pathways for applications under tFDA for the PEPFAR programme, including modifications to applications, review timelines and costs; (3) the role of US patents, US marketing exclusivity rights, and the Medicines Patents Pool in tFDA; and (4) an overview of how applications for PEPFAR programme are processed through the USFDA. We also provide a case study of a new ARV, tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF), not yet reviewed by USFDA for PEPFAR use. Conclusions: In this paper, we describe the importance and implementation of USFDA's tentative approval process to review ARVs for resource-constrained settings. We also highlight the impact of patents and exclusivities on review of HIV drugs under tFDA and illustrate the concepts using a new HIV drug as an example. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)‐positive women can breastfeed with minimal risk of mother‐to‐child transmission if taking antiretrovirals. Guidelines surrounding infant feeding for HIV‐positive women have evolved several times over the last two decades. Our review aimed to explore perspectives of breastfeeding with antiretrovirals from HIV‐positive women since the World Health Organization (2010) infant feeding and antiretroviral guidelines. HIV‐positive pregnant and postnatal women from all countries/settings were eligible. HIV‐positive women were either on an antiretroviral regimen at the time of the study, previously on an antiretroviral regimen, not initiated on a regimen yet, or enrolled in prevention of mother‐to‐child transmission (PMTCT) care. Quality assessment of all included studies were conducted. Four databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO) were searched for studies conducted from January 2010 to October 2020. Nine papers were included in the review, of which two presented findings from the same study. Five analytical themes were developed via thematic synthesis: (1) awareness of breastfeeding with antiretrovirals, (2) turmoil of emotions, (3) coping mechanisms, (4) the intertwining of secret, stigma and support and (5) support needed. Support from family and health care professionals and coping approaches were important to overcome stigma and the emotional challenges of breastfeeding with antiretrovirals. Health care professionals should be familiar with the most updated national and local guidance surrounding infant feeding and antiretrovirals. Further research into interventions to encourage HIV‐positive women to adhere and commit to lifelong antiretroviral treatment (Option B+) for breastfeeding is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction The extraordinary feat of proving the effectiveness of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in clinical trials in different populations in a variety of settings may prove to have been easier than ensuring it is used well. Decision-makers must make difficult choices to realize the promise of antiretroviral prophylaxis for their countries. This paper outlines key economic, regulatory and distributive justice issues that must be addressed for effective and acceptable PrEP implementation. Discussion In considering the role that PrEP can play in combination prevention programmes, decision-makers must determine who can benefit most from PrEP, how PrEP can be provided safely and efficiently, and what kind of health system support will ensure successful implementation. To do this, they need contextualized information on disease burden by population, analyses of how PrEP services might best be delivered, and projections of the human resource and infrastructure requirements for each potential delivery model. There are cost considerations, varying cost-effectiveness results and regulatory challenges. The principles of ethics can inform thorny discussions about who should be prioritized for oral PrEP and how best to introduce it fairly. We describe the cost-effectiveness of PrEP in different populations at higher risk of HIV exposure, its price in low- and middle-income countries, and the current regulatory situation. We explore the principles of ethics that can inform resource allocation decision-making about PrEP anchored in distributive justice, at a time when universal access to antiretroviral treatment remains to be assured. We then highlight the role of advocacy in moving the PrEP agenda forward. Conclusions The time is ripe now for decisions about whether, how and for whom PrEP should be introduced into a country's HIV response. It has the potential to contribute significantly to high impact HIV prevention if it is tailored to those who can most benefit from it and if current regulatory and pricing barriers can be overcome. Advocacy at all levels can help inform decision-making and push the access agenda to avert HIV infections among those at highest risk of HIV exposure. The benefits will accrue beyond the individual level to slow HIV transmission at the population level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses research which examined the role of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in addressing the global HIV/AIDS epidemic. Topics discussed include the papers on the PrEP implementation, potential impact and efficiency, social science concerns and the study of modern PrEP implementation and cost-effectiveness analysis targeting PrEP and antiretroviral (ART).

Women continue to be at special risk for HIV acquisition due to a complex mix of biological, behavioural, structural, cultural and social factors, with unacceptable rates of new infection. Scientific advances over the past decade have highlighted the use of antiretroviral (ARV) drugs as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV acquisition (sexually, parenterally and vertically) and ARV treatment (ART) for HIV-positive patients to prevent onward transmission (treatment as prevention - TasP). This paper reviews the evidence base for PrEP and TasP, describes new products in development and the need to translate research findings into programmes with impact at the population level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]