Search

Analytic treatment interruption (ATI) is scientifically necessary in HIV‐remission ("cure") studies to test the effects of new interventions. However, stopping antiretroviral treatment poses risks to research participants and their sexual partners. Ethical debate about whether and how to conduct such studies has largely centered on designing risk‐mitigation strategies and identifying the responsibilities of research stakeholders. In this paper, we argue that because the possibility of HIV transmission from research participants to partners during ATI cannot practicably be eliminated—that is, it is ineliminable—the successful conduct of such trials ultimately depends on relationships of trust and trustworthiness. We describe our experiences with conducting and studying HIV‐remission trials with ATI in Thailand to examine the strengths, complexities, and limitations of the risk‐mitigation and responsibility approaches and to explore ways in which the building of trust—and trustworthiness—may help enhance the scientific, practical, and ethical dimensions of these trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The HIV Research for Prevention (HIVR4P) conference catalyzes knowledge sharing on biomedical HIV prevention interventions such as HIV vaccines, antibody infusions, pre-exposure prophylaxis, and microbicides in totality—from the molecular details and delivery formulations to the behavioral, social, and structural underpinnings. HIVR4P // Virtual was held over the course of 2 weeks on January 27–28 and February 3–4, 2021 as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continued to inflict unprecedented harm globally. The HIVR4P community came together with 1,802 researchers, care providers, policymakers, implementers, and advocates from 92 countries whose expertise spanned the breadth of the HIV prevention pipeline from preclinical to implementation. The program included 113 oral and 266 poster presentations. This article presents a brief summary of the conference highlights. Complete abstracts, webcasts, and daily rapporteur summaries may be found on the conference website (https://www.hivr4p.org/). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The social/behavioral HIV Decision-Making Study (DMS) assesses informed consent and trial experiences of individuals in HIV remission trials in Thailand. We convened a 1-d multi-stakeholder participatory workshop in Bangkok. We provide a meeting summary and reactions from DMS investigators. Methods Workshop members viewed de-identified interview excerpts from DMS participants. They deliberated on the findings and made recommendations regarding informed choice for remission trials. Notes and recordings were used to create a summary report, which was reviewed by members and refined. Results Workshop members' recommendations included HIV education and psychosocial support to establish the basis for informed choice, key trial information to be provided in everyday language, supportive decision-making processes and psychosocial care during and after the trial. Concerns included participant willingness to restart antiretrovirals after trial-mandated treatment interruption, unintended influence of the research team on decision-making and seemingly altruistic motivations for trial participation that may signal attempts to atone for stigmatized behavior. Conclusions The workshop highlighted community perspectives and resulted in recommendations for supporting informed choice and psychosocial and physical health. These are the first such recommendations arising from a deliberative process. Although some elements are rooted in the Thai context, most are applicable across remission trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]