Pages

Tampilkan postingan dengan label CROI. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label CROI. Tampilkan semua postingan

Is treatment really reducing infections?

via Aidsmap, by Gus Cairns

Moupali Das of the San Francisco Department of Public Health presented evidence to show that the city’s intensive testing and treatment policy was beginning to result in a declining HIV infection rate there. Similar evidence was presented from the province of British Columbia in Canada.

The evidence presented still leaves some questions unanswered, however.
  • Is the reduction in viral load in the HIV-positive population (the 'community viral load' or CVL) really the cause of the decreased level of diagnoses seen in San Francisco in the last few years, or is it due to the success of prevention campaigns and reductions in risky behaviour?
  • Do reduced diagnoses really indicate reduced incidence of infection?
  • Is reducing the average viral load of diagnosed people a good indicator of the average infectiousness of people with HIV in the community – or do high viral loads in the minority who remain undiagnosed make this an unreliable indicator?
The answers to these questions are crucial as the future direction of HIV prevention policy may depend on them, in particular whether to concentrate on suppressing viral load or on behaviour change as the mainspring of prevention.

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.]

CROI 2011: Rectal Microbicides to Prevent HIV Infection in Heterosexual Populations in High-prevalence Settings

Poster from CROI 2011

Dobromir Dimitrov*1, M-C Boily2, S Abdool Karim3, and B Mâsse1,4
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Res Ctr, Seattle, WA, US; 2Imperial Coll London, UK; 3Univ of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa; and 4Univ of Montreal, Canada


Background:
The role of anal intercourse in the overall heterosexual HIV epidemic remains unclear. However, it may be an important risk factor because the considerably higher risk of HIV infection during unprotected receptive anal intercourse compared to vaginal intercourse. Anal intercourse is widely practiced by heterosexuals in many countries; in Tanzania, 6% of sexually active school pupils reported anal intercourse at their first sexual experience. In Cape Town, 10 to 14% of the study participants reported engaging in anal intercourse over the last 3 months. Different mathematical modeling studies have assessed the potential impact of a vaginal microbicide in heterosexual populations and of a rectal microbicide for homosexuals. However, none have assessed the potential impact of a rectal microbicide in heterosexual population. Our study aims to compare the potential impact of rectal, vaginal, and bi-compartment (i.e. applied vaginally and protective during vaginal and anal intercourse) microbicides to prevent HIV acquisition and transmission in heterosexual populations.

Methods:
Risk equations were used to determine under which conditions a rectal microbicide could be as useful as a vaginal microbicide. A transmission dynamic model was used to assess the population-level impact of the different microbicides in a variety of intervention scenarios and high HIV prevalence settings and to predict the fractions of new HIV infections prevented over fixed time periods.

Results:
Without anal intercourse, a 50% efficacious vaginal microbicide used by 100% of females prevents about 10% and 25% of all new male and female HIV infections over 10 years if adherence is 30% and 75%, respectively. These 10-year infection preventions are reduced by 32% in populations with 10% frequency of receptive anal intercourse, assuming 4-fold increase in transmission risk per receptive anal intercourse (RRRAI). A rectal microbicide could be as effective as a vaginal microbicide in populations with anal intercourse rates ranging from 5% to 20% across a range on RRRAI, assuming similar efficacy and frequency of use of both products. A rectal microbicide has less impact than a vaginal microbicide in populations with <5% anal intercourse, unless it is used more often or is more efficacious than a vaginal microbicide. The 10-year infections prevented of bi-compartment microbicide is 2-fold larger than vaginal microbicide in populations with 10% anal intercourse if RRRAI = 10- and ~6-fold larger than rectal microbicide, in populations with 5% anal intercourse if RRRAI = 4.

Conclusions:
Both rectal microbicide and bi-compartmental microbicide are necessary prevention tools for heterosexual populations engaging, relatively frequently (~10% of sex acts), in anal intercourse.


[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.]

Q and A: Moving PrEP from Promising Trial Result to Practical, Public Health Prevention Intervention?

by Julie Davids, AIDS Foundation of Chicago, HIV Prevention Justice Alliance and IRMA member

As noted in these pages and press reports worldwide, the iPrex trial found that daily use of truvada protected gay men, other MSM and trangender women from HIV infection.

Updated data presented at this week's Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI) showed the trial results held true through 144 weeks - nearly three years - and that the key challenge seems to be adherence. Those who took the drug most or all of the time (about 1/2 of the people in the study) had high rates of protection - over 90%. But because the other half took little or no drug at all (as confirmed by blood tests), the overal efficacy rate among trial participants was 44%.

After a long day at the conference, an eager crew of conference-goers - including researchers, people with HIV, White House officials and press - joined local community members here in Boston on Tuesday night in the auditorium of Fenway Community Health for ARV-Based Prevention: A Community & Research Forum on Recent Results and What Happens Next, sponsored by AVAC and Fenway.

At the end of the formal presentations, I asked the panelists (on behalf of the HIV Prevention Justice Alliance)

"What are one to three next steps that are vital to making PrEP [pre-exposure prophylaxis] effective at the community or public health level, rather than just a boutique intervention for a few individuals?"

I captured the responses, which cover a wide range of issues and strategies, and wanted to share them with you. Panelists, in order of response, were:

- Morenike Ukpong, New HIV Vaccines and Microbicide Advocacy Society, Nigeria
- Kevin Cranston, Massachusetts Bureau of Infectious Disease
- Cate Hankins, UNAIDS
- Salim Abdool Karim, CAPRISA
- Jared Baeten, University of Washington and Partners PrEP
- Robert Grant, Gladstone Institute of Virology and Immunology
- Jim Rooney, Gilead Sciences
- Mark Hubbard, Tennessee Association of People With AIDS



Q and A: Moving PrEP from Promising Trial Result to Practical, Public Health Prevention Intervention? from HIV Prevention Justice Alliance on Vimeo.

High-Impact Prevention: New Approach to the Science and Practice of HIV Prevention in the United States?

by Julie Davids, AIDS Foundation of Chicago, HIV Prevention Justice Alliance and IRMA member

This week at the Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI) in Boston, researchers and clinicians from around the world met to share and discuss HIV research.

The opening plenary on Monday was delivered by Jonathan Mermin, Director of the Division of HIV/AIDS (pictured). Titled The Science and Practice of HIV Prevention in the US, the 30 minute presentation outlined Mermin's vision of a new approach called high-impact prevention (HIP). I caught up with Mermin the following day, and asked him to talk about his speech, explaining what HIP is all about.

If this quick video grabs your interest, you can view Mermin's full presentations and slides right here - and you can look around that conference site for more webcasts of important sessions. I'll be blogging about other conference matters of interest to HIV prevention justice advocates in the coming days, including some thoughts on high-impact prevention, pre-exposure prophylaxis, racial disparities in infection, and other matters...



[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.]

PRESS RELEASE: Researchers Reformulate Tenofovir Vaginal Gel for Rectal Use

via Microbicide Trials Network

[The abstract, Tenofovir Gel Reformulation Results in Improved Product Safety for Rectal Application, was presented at a poster session from 2-4 p.m., Monday, Feb. 28. The results of RMP-02/MTN-006 were discussed at a CROI press conference from 7:30-8:30 a.m., Monday, Feb. 28]

‘New’ gel safe in laboratory studies




BOSTON, Feb. 28, 2011 – A change in the formulation of tenofovir gel, an anti-HIV gel developed for vaginal use, may make it safer to use in the rectum, suggests research presented today at the 18th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI). In laboratory tests of rectal tissue, researchers from the Microbicide Trials Network (MTN) found the reformulated gel was less harmful to the lining of the rectum than the original vaginal formulation, and just as effective in protecting cells against HIV.

Researchers are now testing the reformulated gel in an early-phase clinical trial with men and women. Results from these and future studies will have important implications for the development of a rectal microbicide that could help protect against HIV or other sexually transmitted infections during anal sex.

Tenofovir gel has shown significant promise in reducing HIV risk in women through vaginal sex. But because the rectal epithelium – the lining of the rectum that serves as the first line of defense against HIV – is much thinner than the vaginal lining, the gel may not be safe or effective to use rectally. By its nature, tenofovir gel is hyperosmolar – contains a higher concentration of sugars and salts relative to cells. This quality could have a harmful effect on the rectal lining by causing epithelial cells to shrink as they purge water to achieve balance. Weakened in this manner, the rectal epithelium may be less able to protect against HIV.

To make tenofovir gel safe and more amenable to rectal use, researchers from CONRAD, a research organization which holds the rights to develop the gel, reformulated it with a reduced amount of glycerin, a common additive found in many gel-like products. In laboratory tests conducted by MTN researchers, the reformulated gel was three times less likely to cause cells in rectal tissue to release water, and equally effective against HIV as the vaginal formulation.

“The lining of the rectum is much more fragile than the vaginal epithelium, so we can’t be certain a product like tenofovir gel that is safe for vaginal use will be completely safe to use in the rectum,” said Charlene Dezzutti, Ph.D., associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and principal investigator of the MTN Network Laboratory. “We are very encouraged by our laboratory data that suggest the reformulated gel could be safer for rectal use. These results provide an important bridge to clinical studies, and we have already begun testing it with men and women.”

The new formulation of tenofovir gel is being tested for safety and acceptability in a clinical trial called MTN-007, currently underway at three MTN-affiliated sites at the University of Pittsburgh,

RMP-02/MTN-006, the first-ever clinical study to test the safety of vaginal tenofovir gel in the rectum. These results, which were also presented at CROI, found the gel significantly inhibited HIV in tissue samples, but that men and women in the study did not particularly like it and some experienced uncomfortable gastrointestinal side effects. Researchers are hopeful the reformulated gel now being tested in MTN-007 will address these concerns.

In addition to Dr. Dezzutti, other authors of the study are Lisa Rohan, Ph.D., University of Pittsburgh; J.D. Lynam, Magee-Womens Research Institute; Lin Wang, M.D., Ph.D., Magee-Womens Research Institute; and David Friend, Ph.D., CONRAD, Arlington, Va.

Tenofovir gel contains the antiretroviral tenofovir, which is commonly used in the treatment of HIV. Both the oral and vaginal formulations of tenofovir were developed by Gilead Sciences, Inc., of Foster City, Calif. In 2006, Gilead Sciences assigned the rights for tenofovir gel to the International Partnership for Microbicides of Silver Spring, Md., and CONRAD, of Arlington, Va.

The study was conducted through the MTN, which is funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Division of AIDS with co-funding from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

# # #

The abstract, Tenofovir Gel Reformulation Results in Improved Product Safety for Rectal Application, was presented at a poster session from 2-4 p.m., Monday, Feb. 28. The results of RMP-02/MTN-006 were discussed at a CROI press conference from 7:30-8:30 a.m., Monday, Feb. 28.

About the Microbicide Trials Network

The Microbicide Trials Network (MTN) is an HIV/AIDS clinical trials network established in 2006 by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases with co-funding from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the National Institute of Mental Health, all components of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Based at Magee-Womens Research Institute and the University of Pittsburgh, the MTN brings together international investigators and community and industry partners who are devoted to preventing or reducing the sexual transmission of HIV through the development and evaluation of products applied topically to mucosal surfaces or administered orally.


[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.]

PRESS RELEASE: Tenofovir Gel Provides High Level of Protection Against HIV in Rectal Tissue

via Microbicide Trials Network

[The abstract, RMP-02/MTN-006: A Phase I Placebo Controlled Trial of Rectally Applied 1% Vaginal Tenofovir Gel with Comparison to Oral Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate, is being presented at a scientific session at CROI 2011 TODAY from 10 a.m. - 12:15 p.m. ET.]



Strongest effect seen in tissue taken from participants after one week of use


BOSTON, Feb. 28, 2011 – A gel developed to protect against HIV during vaginal sex produced a strong antiviral effect when used in the rectum, according to an early-phase study presented today at the 18th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI). The results, based on rectal tissue biopsies sampled from HIV-negative men and women who used the product daily for one week, provide the first-ever evidence that tenofovir gel could help reduce the risk of HIV from anal sex, even though the vaginal gel formulation may not be optimal for rectal use.

Tenofovir gel was not especially well-liked by a majority of men and women in the study, yet most reported they would be likely to use the gel if it became available in the future as a method for preventing HIV. Although the study found use of the gel generally safe, side effects were problematic to a few study participants. In hopes of making tenofovir gel more acceptable for rectal use, researchers have since modified the gel and are now testing it in another study.

“We are very encouraged about these findings that indicate applying tenofovir gel topically to the rectum could be a promising approach to HIV prevention,” said Peter Anton, M.D., professor of medicine and director of the Center for Prevention Research at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), who led the study with Ian McGowan, M.D., Ph.D., co-principal investigator of the Microbicide Trials Network (MTN) and professor of medicine at the University of Pittsburgh.

“These are early results, but help set the stage for current and future trials of rectal microbicides and the development of a rectal-specific formulation of tenofovir gel,” added Dr. McGowan, who is leading the second study of the new gel formulation.

Microbicides, products applied on the inside of the rectum or vagina, are being designed and tested to help prevent or reduce the sexual transmission of HIV or other sexually transmitted infections. The majority of microbicide research thus far has focused on products to prevent HIV during vaginal sex. Yet, the risk of becoming infected with HIV from unprotected anal sex may be at least 20 times greater than unprotected vaginal sex, in part because the rectal lining is only one-cell thick compared to the vagina’s multiple layers, making it easier for the virus to reach cells to infect.

The study, known as RMP-02/MTN-006, is the first clinical trial of tenofovir gel for rectal use. Last year, tenofovir gel was shown in a trial called CAPRISA 004 to reduce the risk of HIV infection in women who used it before and after vaginal sex.

Conducted at UCLA and the University of Pittsburgh, RMP-02/MTN-006 tested two products – tenofovir gel and oral tenofovir – in 18 sexually abstinent, HIV-negative men and women. Oral tenofovir, an antiretroviral (ARV) tablet commonly used to treat people with HIV in combination with other ARVs, is being explored as a means to prevent infection in people who are HIV-negative through an approach called pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP.

The trial directly compared the anti-HIV activity of a single dose of oral tenofovir to a single dose of rectally-applied tenofovir gel. This was followed by six days of at-home dosing of tenofovir gel or a placebo gel, with the last and seventh dose given in the clinic. A novel approach was used to determine whether any actual protection was provided by the drug given in the different regimens – single oral, single gel and seven-day gel (or placebo) – in which small biopsies were taken from the rectal lining of the participants using a standard clinical procedure called sigmoidoscopy. The tissue samples were then sent directly to the laboratory where they were exposed to HIV to determine how well study products protected the tissue from infection.

The researchers found that HIV was significantly inhibited in tissue samples from participants who used tenofovir gel daily for one week compared to tissue from participants who used the placebo gel. While a slight anti-viral effect was noted in tissue from participants who received a single dose of tenofovir gel, the finding was not statistically significant. The single dose of oral tenofovir did not provide any protection against HIV in rectal tissue samples.

“These kinds of efforts early in the development phase of rectal microbicides can give us insight into a particular product’s potential efficacy, which enables us to better design and hasten the pace of future clinical trials,” said Dr. Anton.

According to self-reports, only 25 percent of men and women who had used the tenofovir gel said they liked it. However, when asked whether they would consider using the product in the future, 75 percent of these participants reported a high likelihood of future use. Two of the 12 participants who received tenofovir gel reported severe gastrointestinal side effects, including diarrhea and lower abdominal cramps.

“These results tell us that tenofovir gel was relatively safe to use in the rectum for most participants, but we need to address side effects to make it more acceptable to use,” said Dr. Anton, who reported the findings at CROI. “Even though three-quarters of the participants reported they didn’t like the gel, we are very encouraged that the majority would consider using such a product in the future.”

Another study, MTN-007, now underway is using a formulation of tenofovir gel with less glycerin, a common additive found in many gel-like products, in the hope that this will make it better tolerated when used in the rectum. Laboratory tests of the reformulated gel suggest it is just as effective as the original formulation but less irritating to the epithelium – the layer of cells that serves as a protective barrier inside the rectum. The study began in October 2010 and is enrolling 60 men and women at three sites – University of Pittsburgh, University of Alabama at Birmingham and Fenway Health in Boston.

In addition to Drs. Anton and McGowan, other authors of RMP-02/MTN-006 are Ross Cranston, M.D., University of Pittsburgh; Alex Carballo-Dieguez, Ph.D., Columbia University; Angela Kashuba, PharmD, University of North Carolina; Elena Khanukhova, UCLA; Julie Elliott, UCLA; Laura Janocko, Ph.D., MTN and Magee-Womens Research Institute; William Cumberland, Ph.D., UCLA; and Christine Mauck, M.D., M.P.H., CONRAD.

RMP-02/MTN-006 was a collaboration between the Microbicide Development Program at UCLA and the MTN. UCLA’s Microbicide Development Program is funded by the Division of AIDS Integrated Preclinical/Clinical Program for HIV Topical Microbicides at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The study products were developed by Gilead Sciences, Inc., of Foster City, Calif., which assigned the rights for tenofovir gel to the International Partnership for Microbicides of Silver Spring, Md., and CONRAD, of Arlington, Va., in December 2006. Gilead Sciences and CONRAD provided the study products free of charge.

# # #

Additional information about the study and rectal microbicides is available here.

The Microbicide Trials Network (MTN) is an HIV/AIDS clinical trials network established in 2006 by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases with co-funding from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the National Institute of Mental Health, all components of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Based at Magee-Womens Research Institute and the University of Pittsburgh, the MTN brings together international investigators and community and industry partners who are devoted to preventing or reducing the sexual transmission of HIV through the development and evaluation of products applied topically to mucosal surfaces or administered orally.


[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.]