| Literature DB >> 24086333 |
Freddie M Kibengo1, Eugene Ruzagira, David Katende, Agnes N Bwanika, Ubaldo Bahemuka, Jessica E Haberer, David R Bangsberg, Burc Barin, James F Rooney, David Mark, Paramesh Chetty, Patricia Fast, Anatoli Kamali, Frances H Priddy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Efficacy of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in prevention of HIV acquisition has been evaluated using a daily regimen. However, adherence to long term daily medication is rarely perfect. Intermittent regimen may be a feasible alternative. Preclinical studies have demonstrated effectiveness of intermittent PrEP in SHIV prevention among animals. However, little is known about intermittent PrEP regimens.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24086333 PMCID: PMC3784443 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0074314
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Baseline demographics and HIV risk factors for the past 28 days by treatment assignment and treatment schedule.
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 12 (50) | 13 (54) | 4 (33) | 7 (58) | 36 (50) | |
|
| 33 (20-47) | 33 (22-48) | 33 (26-47) | 33 (27-46) | 33 (20-48) | |
|
| 2 (8) | 2 (8) | 2 (17) | 0 | 6 (8) | |
|
| 1 (2) | 0 (0) | 1 (3) | 0 (0) | 1 (1) | |
|
| 2 (8) | 1 (4) | 3 (25) | 2 (17) | 8 (11) | |
|
| ||||||
|
| 23 (96) | 17 (71) | 12 (100) | 8 (67) | 60 (83) | |
|
| 1 (4) | 6 (25) | 0 | 4 (33) | 11 (15) | |
|
| 0 | 1 (4) | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (8) | 1 (1) | |
|
| 24 (100) | 23 (96) | 12 (100) | 11 (92) | 70 (97) | |
|
| 0 | 1 (4) | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (8) | 1 (1) | |
|
| 1 (4) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | |
|
| 3 (13) | 2 (8) | 1 (8) | 1 (8) | 7 (10) | |
|
| 1 (4) | 4 (17) | 1 (8) | 0 | 6 (8) | |
|
| 19 (79) | 18 (75) | 10 (83) | 10 (83) | 57 (79) | |
Number (percentage) of volunteers with AEs categorized by maximum severity experienced, and treatment assignment and schedule.
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
| 2 (8) | 12 (50) | 10 (42) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
|
| 1 (4) | 12 (50) | 11 (46) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| 0 (0) | 4 (33) | 8 (67) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
|
| 1 (8) | 2 (17) | 8 (67) | 0 (0) | 1 (8) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
PrEP adherence rates for daily and intermittent groups.
|
| Adherence parameter |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Overall unadjusted | 98 [89-100] | 96 [95-99] | 0.87 | 97 [92-100] |
| Adjusted1 | 98 [92-100] | 98 [95-99] | 0.88 | 98 [93-100] | |
|
| Overall2 | 80 [74-86] | 78 [67-86] | 0.60 | 80 [73-86] |
| Fixed doses | 91 [78-102] | 88 [69-94] | 0.25 | 91 [73-97] | |
| Post-coital doses (MEMS events and sexual events per SMS)3 | 40 [23-58] | 53 [15-79] | 0.45 | 45 [20-63] | |
| Post-coital doses- (MEMS events and timeline follow back self-report sexual events)[ | 39 [29-56] | 31 [21-59] | 0.58 | 37 [25-56] | |
| Post-coital doses within 2hrs (timeline followback self report and sexual events per SMS)5 | 110 [67-129] | 93 [68-113] | 0.55 | 101 [67-129] | |
| Post-coital doses within 2 hrs (self-report of doses and sexual events per timeline follow-back calendar)6 | 100 [94-100] | 100 [85-100] | 0.46 | 100 [93-100] |
1 Adjusted monthly MEMS adherence for the daily group was calculated as the number of curiosity openings was subtracted from the number of MEMS openings, while the number of pocket doses was added to the number of MEMS openings, divided by 28.
2 Unadjusted monthly MEMS adherence for the intermittent group was calculated as the sum of days when volunteers were adherent to fixed dosing (Mondays and Fridays with a MEMS event, and non-Mondays and non-Fridays on which neither sexual activity nor a MEMS event occurred) plus post-coital dosing (other days on which sexual activity was reported by SMS and a MEMS event occurred), divided by 28
3 Adherence to post-coital doses calculated as number of MEMS events on sexual event days in a 28-day interval divided by the number of sexual event days per SMS.
4 Adherence to post-coital doses calculated as the number of MEMS events on days with timeline followback reported sexual events divided by the number of days with timeline followback reported sexual events.
5 Adherence to post-coital doses within 2 hours of sex calculated as the number of days of post-coital dosing within 2 hours of sex by timeline followback report divided by the number of days with sexual events per SMS.
6 Adherence to post-coital doses within 2 hours of sex calculated as the number of days on which post-coital dosing occurred within 2 hours of sex by timeline followback report divided by the number of days on which sexual events occurred by timeline followback report.