Search

Pregnant and breastfeeding populations are at substantial risk of acquiring HIV in some settings, yet are underrepresented in clinical trials of new pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) agents. Several PrEP formulations are in development (eg, vaginal rings, long-acting injectables, and other modalities). Pregnant and breastfeeding populations are typically excluded from initial clinical trials. We identified 14 PrEP trials of novel agents in non-pregnant or non-breastfeeding populations, and six phase 1-3 trials and open label extensions among pregnant and breastfeeding populations, that are currently ongoing or complete. A framework shift is needed to consider the ethical costs of excluding pregnant and breastfeeding populations at risk for HIV in PrEP clinical trials and promote inclusion to maximise the benefits from PrEP tools in the pipeline. Research on new PrEP agents should include pregnant and breastfeeding populations to avoid delays in reaching those who could benefit from PrEP after efficacy is established.

Adolescents in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) have a high prevalence of HIV, therefore, it is important that they are included in HIV research. However, ethical challenges regarding consent can hinder adolescent research participation. We examined examples from the Prevention and Treatment Through a Comprehensive Care Continuum for HIV-affected Adolescents in Resource Constrained Settings (PATC3H) research consortium, which investigates adolescent HIV prevention and treatment in seven LMICs: Brazil, Kenya, Mozambique, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda, and Zambia. PATC3H researchers were asked to identify ethical and practical challenges of adolescent consent to research participation in these countries. We also did a scoping review of strategies that could improve adolescent participation in LMIC HIV studies. Examples from PATC3H research highlighted many ethical challenges that affect adolescent participation, including inconsistent or absent consent guidance, guidelines that fail to account for the full array of adolescents' lives, and variation in how ethical review committees assess adolescent studies. Our scoping review identified three consent-related strategies to expand adolescent inclusion: waiving parental consent requirements, allowing adolescents to independently consent, and implementing surrogate decision making. Our analyses suggest that these strategies should be further explored and incorporated into ethical and legal research guidance to increase adolescent inclusion in LMIC HIV research.

Introduction: Young women in Southern Africa have extremely high HIV incidence rates necessitating the availability of female-controlled prevention methods. Understanding adolescent preference for seeking contraception would improve our understanding of acceptability feasibility and adherence to similar modes of delivery for HIV prevention. Methods: UChoose was an open-label randomized crossover study over 32 weeks which aimed to evaluate the acceptability and preference for contraceptive options in healthy HIV-uninfected, female adolescents aged 15 to 19 years, as a proxy for similar HIV prevention methods. Participants were assigned to a contraceptive method for a period of 16 weeks in the form of a bi-monthly injectable contraceptive, monthly vaginal Nuvaring[R] or daily combined oral contraceptive (COC) and then asked to state their preference. At 16 weeks, participants crossed over to another contraceptive method, to ensure that all participants tried the Nuvaring[R] (least familiar modality) and additionally either the injection or COC. Primary outcomes were contraceptive acceptability and preference. At the end of the 32 weeks they were also asked to imagine their preference for an HIV prevention modality. Secondary endpoints included changes in sexual behaviour, contraceptive adherence and preference for biomedical and behavioural HIV prevention methods. Results: Of the 180 participants screened, 130 were enrolled and randomized to the Nuvaring[R] (n = 45), injection (n = 45) or COC (n = 40). Significantly more Nuvaring[R] users (24/116; 20.7%) requested to change to another contraceptive option compared to injection (1/73; 1.4% p = 0.0002) and COC users (4/49; 8% p = 0.074). Of those that remained on the Nuvaring[R], adherence was significantly higher than to COC (p < 0.0001). Significantly more injection users (77/80; 96.3%) thought this delivery mode was convenient to use compared to Nuvaring[R] (74/89; 83.1%; p = 0.0409) or COC (38/50; 76.0%; p = 0.0034). Overall, the preferred contraceptive choice was injection, followed by the ring and lastly the pill. Conclusions: Adherence to daily COC was difficult for adolescents in this cohort and the least favoured potential HIV prevention option. While some preferred vaginal ring use, these data suggest that long-acting injectables would be the preferred prevention method for adolescent girls and young women. This study highlights the need for additional options for HIV prevention in youth. Keywords: HIV prevention; youth; South Africa; preference; adolescent girls; adherence, 1 | INTRODUCTION South Africa has the highest burden of HIV in the world with a national prevalence of 18.9% [1-3]. Adolescent girls and young women account for 29% of [...]

Background: Stakeholder engagement is increasingly recognized as a key component of ethical research in leading ethics guidelines. Ethics commentators have also argued that engagement has several beneficial outcomes for the field. Aim: This paper reports on the beneficial outcomes of stakeholder engagement in HIV prevention trials as perceived by stakeholders in the field. Method: We conducted 28 interviews between 2019 and 2021 with interviewees from various stakeholder groups in 12 countries and used thematic analysis to analyze the transcripts. Findings: We found three major themes - namely emPowerment where engagement is perceived to empower stakeholders, Partnerships where engagement is perceived to build equitable relationships and Protections where engagement is perceived to strengthen protections for participants and community stakeholders and to improve science. Conclusions: These findings map closely onto beneficial outcomes envisaged by ethics guidelines, however, the relationship between outcomes seen as beneficial deserves further exploration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Clinical trials of biomedical HIV prevention modalities require the cooperation of multiple stakeholders. Key stakeholders, such as community members, may have stark vulnerabilities. Consequently, calls for HIV prevention researchers to implement 'stakeholder engagement' are increasingly common. Such engagement is held to benefit inter-stakeholder relations, stakeholders themselves and the research itself. The ethics review process presents a unique opportunity to strengthen stakeholder engagement practices in HIV prevention trials. However, this is not necessarily straightforward. In this article, we consider several complexities. First, is stakeholder engagement a legitimate component of what Research Ethics Committees (RECs) should review for HIV prevention trials? Second, what are the core features of engagement that should be under ethics review? Third, what are the key practices that should be highlighted in ethics review? Methods: To address these questions, we examined the international ethics guidelines specialized for such trials (UNAIDS 2012, UNAIDS-AVAC GPP 2011) and directly applicable to such trials (CIOMS 2016; WHO 2011). Thematic analysis was used to code and analyse these guidelines. Results and discussion: Ethics guidelines support REC review of engagement. Guidance recommends that engagement be broad and inclusive; early and sustained; and dynamic and responsive. Broad engagement practices include evaluating the context, planning in writing, and resourcing. RECs should assess engagement as part of a comprehensive review, and recommend revisions where necessary. Researchers should profile key elements of engagement valued in ethics guidance, when they draft ethics submissions. Importantly, the ethics review process should not undermine the 'dynamic responsiveness' required for excellent engagement in this field. Conclusions: As evidence-informed engagement strategies emerge, these should inform the ethics submission and review process. Both parties in the review process should strive to avoid a superficial, check-list type approach that caricatures what should be a thorough, nuanced ethics review of a rich, responsive engagement process. Keywords: Stakeholder engagement; community engagement; ethics review; Research Ethics Committee; Institutional Review Boards; HIV prevention trials, 1 | INTRODUCTION HIV prevention trials are complex endeavours. Ethics guidelines recognize several background complexities with such trials that trigger the need for stakeholder engagement. UNAIDS [1] notes the pragmatic [...]

Abstract Background South Africa is likely to be the first country in the world to host an adolescent HIV vaccine trial. Adolescents may be enrolled in late 2007. In the development and review of adolescent HIV vaccine trial protocols there are many complexities to consider, and much work to be done if these important trials are to become a reality. Discussion This article sets out essential requirements for the lawful conduct of adolescent research in South Africa including compliance with consent requirements, child protection laws, and processes for the ethical and regulatory approval of research. Summary This article outlines likely complexities for researchers and research ethics committees, including determining that trial interventions meet current risk standards for child research. Explicit recommendations are made for role-players in other jurisdictions who may also be planning such trials. This article concludes with concrete steps for implementing these important trials in South Africa and other jurisdictions, including planning for consent processes; delineating privacy rights; compiling information necessary for ethics committees to assess risks to child participants; training trial site staff to recognize when disclosures trig mandatory reporting response; networking among relevant ethics commitees; and lobbying the National Regulatory Authority for guidance.