Comprehension of informed consent and voluntary participation in registration cohorts for phase IIb HIV vaccine trial in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: a qualitative descriptive study

BACKGROUND

Informed consent as stipulated in regulatory human research guidelines requires volunteers to be well-informed about what will happen to them in a trial. However, researchers may be faced with the challenge of how to ensure that a volunteer agreeing to take part in a clinical trial is truly informed. This study aimed to find out volunteers' comprehension of informed consent and voluntary participation in Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) clinical trials during the registration cohort.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study among volunteers who were enrolled in the registration cohort of HIV clinical trials in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. A purposive sampling strategy was used to obtain twenty study participants. The data were collected between June and September 2020 using a semi-structured interview guide. In-depth interviews were used to collect the data to obtain deep insights of the individual study participants on the comprehension of informed consent and participation in the clinical trial. A thematic analysis approach was used to analyze the data. Themes and subthemes were supported by the quotes from the participants.

RESULTS

Volunteers described comprehension of informed consent from different perspectives. They reported that various components of the informed consent such as study procedure, confidentiality, risk and benefits were grasped during engagement meetings. Furthermore, the volunteers' decision to participate in the registration cohort was voluntary. However, trial aspects such as health insurance, free condoms, and medical checkups could have indirectly influenced their reluctance to withdraw from the study.

CONCLUSION

Engagement meetings may increase the comprehension of informed consent among potential participants for HIV clinical trials. However, trial incentives may influence participation, and thus future research should focus on the challenges of giving incentives in the study. This will ensure comprehension and voluntary participation in the context of HIV clinical trials.

Exploring the Engagement of Racial and Ethnic Minorities in HIV Treatment and Vaccine Clinical Trials: A Scoping Review of Literature and Implications for Future Research

HIV disproportionately impacts US racial and ethnic minorities but they participate in treatment and vaccine clinical trials at a lower rate than whites. To summarize barriers and facilitators to this participation we conducted a scoping review of the literature guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies published from January 2007 and September 2019 were reviewed. Thirty-one articles were identified from an initial pool of 325 records using three coders. All records were then assessed for barriers and facilitators and summarized. Results indicate that while racial and ethnic minority participation in these trials has increased over the past 10 years, rates still do not proportionately reflect their burden of HIV infection. While many of the barriers mirror those found in other disease clinical trials (e.g., cancer), HIV stigma is a unique and important barrier to participating in HIV clinical trials. Recommendations to improve recruitment and retention of racial and ethnic minorities include training health care providers on the importance of recruiting diverse participants, creating interdisciplinary research teams that better represent who is being recruited, and providing culturally competent trial designs. Despite the knowledge of how to better recruit racial and ethnic minorities, few interventions have been documented using these strategies. Based on the findings of this review, we recommend that future clinical trials engage community stakeholders in all stages of the research process through community-based participatory research approaches and promote culturally and linguistically appropriate recruitment and retention strategies for marginalized populations overly impacted by HIV.

Reported Participation Benefits in International HIV Prevention Research with People Who Inject Drugs

Given ethical concerns about research involving people who inject drugs and those affected by HIV, identifying potential participation benefits is important. We evaluated participant-reported benefits in a trial conducted in Indonesia, Ukraine, and Vietnam that assessed an intervention combining psychosocial counseling and referral for antiretroviral therapy and substance use treatment for HIV-infected people who use drugs. Reported benefits were aggregated into three groups: clinical (antiretroviral therapy, reduced cravings, reduced drug use, lab testing, medical referral, mental health, physical health), social (employment, financial, relationships, reduced stigma), and general (gained knowledge, life improvement). Overall, 438 index participants (90.5%) and 642 injection partners (83.1%) reported at least one benefit. Significantly more index participants who received the study intervention reported at least one benefit versus those who received the standard of care. Clinical trial participation can provide broad direct and indirect benefits for stigmatized populations, which has implications for assessing the ethical appropriateness of studies with such populations.

Going off antiretroviral treatment in a closely monitored HIV "cure" trial: longitudinal assessments of acutely diagnosed trial participants and decliners

INTRODUCTION

The South East Asia Research Collaboration in HIV (SEARCH) RV411 clinical trial in Thailand was a systematic investigation of analytic treatment interruption (ATI) in individuals diagnosed and treated since Fiebig stage I acute HIV infection. Here, we explore decision-making processes and perceptions of trial participation in a phase I trial that raised important ethical considerations, to identify potential areas of improvement in this relatively new field of HIV research. Similar considerations apply to other HIV phase I trials, especially those involving ATI, making this trial a model to identify challenges and opportunities in promoting informed choice.

METHODS

Using longitudinal semi-structured interviews and a validated questionnaire, we examined how decisions to join or decline the trial were made, whether there was evidence of decisional conflict, and reactions to the trial outcomes. We also explored contrasting views and experiences in this small trial cohort. We report analyses of data from these questionnaires and interviews, conducted from February through December of 2016 with the 14 SEARCH cohort participants who either joined (n = 8) or declined (n = 6) participation in RV411.

RESULTS

The eight participants and six decliners had low overall decisional conflict, which remained low over time. Decision making was more difficult for decliners than participants, at least initially. While all interviewees described being satisfied with their decisions, our study identified important negative consequences for a few individuals, including seroconversion, negative experiences with optional procedures and disappointment due to rapid viral rebound.

CONCLUSIONS

Although our results reflect the experiences of a small group invited to join this trial, our overall finding of low decisional conflict even while some individuals reported negative experiences provides lessons for clinical trial investigators. We developed points-to-consider in helping participants make informed choices, to support participants during the trial and to support decliners in their decisions.

Stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence

INTRODUCTION

Stakeholder engagement is an essential component of HIV clinical trials. We define stakeholder engagement as an input by individuals or groups with an interest in HIV clinical trials to inform the design or conduct of said trials. Despite its value, stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials has not been rigorously examined. The purpose of our systematic review is to examine stakeholder engagement for HIV clinical trials and compare it to the recommendations of the UNAIDS/AVAC Good Participatory Practice (GPP) guidelines.

METHODS

We used the PRISMA checklist and identified English language studies describing stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials. Four databases (PubMed, Ovid, CINAHL and Web of Science) and six journals were searched, with additional studies identified using handsearching and expert input. Two independent reviewers examined citations, abstracts and full texts. Data were extracted on country, engagement methods, stakeholder types and purpose of stakeholder engagement. Based on the GPP guidelines, we examined how frequently stakeholder engagement was conducted to inform clinical trial research question development, protocol development, recruitment, enrolment, follow-up, results and dissemination.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Of the 917 citations identified, 108 studies were included in the analysis. Forty-eight studies (44.4%) described stakeholder engagement in high-income countries, thirty (27.8%) in middle-income countries and nine (8.3%) in low-income countries. Fourteen methods for stakeholder engagement were identified, including individual (e.g. interviews) and group (e.g. community advisory boards) strategies. Thirty-five types of stakeholders were engaged, with approximately half of the studies (60; 55.6%) engaging HIV-affected community stakeholders (e.g. people living with HIV, at-risk or related populations of interest). We observed greater frequency of stakeholder engagement to inform protocol development (49 studies; 45.4%) and trial recruitment (47 studies; 43.5%). Fewer studies described stakeholder engagement to inform post-trial processes related to trial results (3; 2.8%) and dissemination (11; 10.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings identify important directions for future stakeholder engagement research and suggestions for policy. Most notably, we found that stakeholder engagement was more frequently conducted to inform early stages of HIV clinical trials compared to later stages. In order to meet recommendations established in the GPP guidelines, greater stakeholder engagement across all clinical trial stages is needed.

Developing a Bayesian adaptive design for a phase I clinical trial: a case study for a novel HIV treatment

The design of phase I studies is often challenging, because of limited evidence to inform study protocols. Adaptive designs are now well established in cancer but much less so in other clinical areas. A phase I study to assess the safety, pharmacokinetic profile and antiretroviral efficacy of C34-PEG₄ -Chol, a novel peptide fusion inhibitor for the treatment of HIV infection, has been set up with Medical Research Council funding. During the study workup, Bayesian adaptive designs based on the continual reassessment method were compared with a more standard rule-based design, with the aim of choosing a design that would maximise the scientific information gained from the study. The process of specifying and evaluating the design options was time consuming and required the active involvement of all members of the trial's protocol development team. However, the effort was worthwhile as the originally proposed rule-based design has been replaced by a more efficient Bayesian adaptive design. While the outcome to be modelled, design details and evaluation criteria are trial specific, the principles behind their selection are general. This case study illustrates the steps required to establish a design in a novel context. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Week 96 efficacy and safety of darunavir/ritonavir monotherapy vs. darunavir/ritonavir with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in the PROTEA trial

OBJECTIVES

PROTEA is a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) monotherapy as an alternative to triple therapy.

METHODS

Patients fully suppressed on first-line antiretrovirals (viral load < 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL) were switched to DRV/r 800/100 mg once daily, either as monotherapy (n = 137) or with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) (n = 136). Treatment failure was HIV-1 RNA level ≥ 50 copies/mL at week 96 or discontinuation of study treatment [Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm].

RESULTS

Patients were mainly male and white, with mean age 44 years. In the primary efficacy analysis, the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL by week 96 [intent to treat (ITT)] was lower in the DRV/r monotherapy arm (103 of 137 patients; 75%) than in the triple therapy arm (116 of 136 patients; 85%) [difference -10.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -19.5, -0.7%]. In the switch-included analysis, monotherapy was noninferior to triple therapy. In a post hoc analysis, for patients with nadir CD4 count ≥ 200 cells/μL, rates of HIV-1 RNA suppression were 82 of 96 patients (85%) in the DRV/r monotherapy arm and 88 of 106 patients (83%) in the triple therapy arm. No treatment-emergent primary protease inhibitor mutations were detected in either arm. The frequency of adverse events was similar in the two arms; however, one patient in the monotherapy arm was hospitalized with HIV encephalitis and elevated cerebrospinal fluid HIV-1 RNA.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, in patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at baseline, switching to DRV/r monotherapy showed lower efficacy vs. triple therapy at week 96 in the primary ITT switch-equals-failure analysis, particularly in patients with CD4 counts < 200 cells/μL.

Cobicistat-boosted protease inhibitors in HIV-infected patients with mild to moderate renal impairment

BACKGROUND

Cobicistat (COBI) is a pharmacoenhancer that optimizes systemic exposures of protease inhibitors (PIs) such as atazanavir (ATV) and darunavir (DRV).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of switching ritonavir (RTV) to COBI in patients with creatinine clearance (CrCl) 50 to 89 mL/min who are virologically suppressed on a stable regimen containing ritonavir (RTV)-boosted ATV or DRV. Other components of the regimen remained unchanged.

METHODS

A phase 3, non-comparative, open-label clinical trial.

RESULTS

Seventy-three patients were enrolled. At week 48, 82% maintained virologic suppression. No emergent resistance developed. Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 7%, and study drug discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 10% (7 patients). There were 2 renal discontinuations and no cases of proximal renal tubulopathy. Small reductions in CrCl (median [IQR]) were observed as early as week 2, after which they were nonprogressive through week 48 (-3.8 [-9 to 0.8]). Changes in CrCl by baseline CrCl (< 70 vs ≥ 70) were -1.1 [-6.5 to 6.3] versus -6.6 [-12.4 to -0.7], respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In HIV-1-infected patients with CrCl 50 to 89 mL/min switching from RTV to COBI, COBI-boosted PIs in combination with 2 nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors were well-tolerated and effective in maintaining virologic suppression. The renal safety profile of COBI in this study was consistent with the long-term data in patients without renal impairment from the phase 3 studies of COBI-containing regimens.

Has the time come to abandon efavirenz for first-line antiretroviral therapy?

Efavirenz has been recommended as a preferred third agent together with two nucleos(t)ides for first-line combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) for >15 years. The availability of efavirenz in a fixed-dose combination makes it very attractive. However, because of (i) adverse events associated with efavirenz, (ii) a poorer overall efficacy of efavirenz compared with newer antiretrovirals, (iii) the ranking of efavirenz as FDA Pregnancy Category D and (iv) the relatively high prevalence of transmitted drug-resistance mutations, there is a need to reconsider the role of efavirenz in first-line ART. We review the available evidence that challenges efavirenz's current position in first-line HIV treatment guidelines. Apart from its animal teratogenic potential, and moderate neuropsychiatric adverse events associated with its use, efavirenz has recently been associated with an increased risk of suicidality when compared with other antiretroviral drugs. Most importantly, efavirenz has demonstrated overall inferior efficacy to various comparator drugs, which include rilpivirine, raltegravir and dolutegravir, in antiretroviral-naive patients. Furthermore, epidemiological data indicate that the prevalence of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance has reached 5%-8% in various parts of the world, and minority transmitted non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance-associated mutations can have a negative impact on the outcome of first-line efavirenz-based ART. Based on considerations of efficacy, toxicity and resistance, it is time to reconsider the routine use of efavirenz in ART. This, of course, presupposes that other antiretrovirals will be available in place of efavirenz, and may not be applicable in certain developing country settings where this is not the case.

Switching to darunavir/ritonavir monotherapy vs. triple-therapy on body fat redistribution and bone mass in HIV-infected adults: the Monarch randomized controlled trial

Changes in body fat distribution and bone mass in HIV-infected patients may be associated with long-term use of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). The Monarch trial recruited 30 patients receiving non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or protease inhibitor-based highly active antiretroviral therapy, with HIV RNA <40 copies/mL. Patients were randomized to either darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg once daily monotherapy or darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg once daily + two NRTIs. Bone mass, peripheral lipoatrophy and central fat accumulation were assessed using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scanning, supplemented by computed tomography scans. Median age was 43 years, 77% were men. Visceral adipose tissue remained stable from baseline to Week 48 in the whole group (p = 0.261) with no significant difference between arms (p = 0.56). There was a significant reduction in insulin resistance (HOMA-IR, p = 0.013) over 48 weeks in the whole group, but not of body mass index (p = 0.24). In the darunavir/ritonavir monotherapy arm, there was a small but significant increase in both lumbar and femur bone mineral density at 48 weeks and was observed after correction for baseline values. The absolute change in lumbar bone mineral density at 48 weeks was more pronounced in the darunavir/ritonavir arm compared with the darunavir/ritonavir + 2NRTIs arm. In this study, discontinuing nucleoside analogues and switching to darunavir/ritonavir monotherapy was associated with a small but statistically significant increase in bone mineral density, but stable levels of limb fat and visceral adipose tissue.