Paula Frew1, Kimberly Parker2, Takeia Horton3, Brooke Hixson4, Lisa Flowers5, Frances Priddy6, Lisa Grohskopf7, Christine Mauck8, Kimberly Workowski9. 1. Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, USA ; Emory Center for AIDS Research, USA ; The Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, USA ; Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health, USA. 2. Texas Woman's University, USA. 3. The Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, USA ; Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health, USA. 4. Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, USA ; The Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, USA ; Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health, USA. 5. Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, USA. 6. Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, USA ; International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, USA. 7. United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USA. 8. CONRAD, USA. 9. Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, USA ; Emory Center for AIDS Research, USA ; The Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This mixed methods study reports on product acceptance from a Phase I clinical trial of a candidate non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) vaginal microbicide product (UC781). The product was evaluated in the context of a Phase I clinical trial in an area characterized by high HIV prevalence among minority women. The findings will inform the development of an acceptable microbicide that will address the needs of diverse women and their partners. METHODS: This is a mixed methods study of 34 racially and ethnically diverse female participants and 10 male partners in Atlanta, Georgia. Chi-square tests for marginal homogeneity and kappa statistics were calculated to analyze differences between groups on product attributes and use intention. ANOVA was used to examine difference between the treatment groups. Qualitative data were analyzed via constant comparative methodology. RESULTS: Thirty-four out of the original female cohort of 36 completed the questionnaire. Approval of future microbicide development was high at 91.2% (n=31) despite a lack of enthusiasm for the placebo and UC781 formulations. Overall female acceptability was correlated with personal protection motivation (r=1.00, p<0.001). African American women indicated greater likelihood of post-licensure microbicide use (X2(3)=7.9, p=0.048) and ascribed greater importance to its potential protection against HIV (X2(4)=18.7, p=0.001) and its potential for dual protection (protective against STIs and/or pregnancy) compared to white women (X2(4)=11.3, p=0.024). Men and women supported development in the form of an intravaginal ring or suppository. Men were more likely to encourage female adoption of the method if it afforded HIV protection (r=0.935, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although most women agreed that the development of a microbicide was an important endeavor, quantitative and qualitative data indicated they would not use placebo or UC781 due to the objectionable viscosity, odor, and color. Male partners felt the potential protective benefit of a future microbicide product was its most important feature.
BACKGROUND: This mixed methods study reports on product acceptance from a Phase I clinical trial of a candidate non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) vaginal microbicide product (UC781). The product was evaluated in the context of a Phase I clinical trial in an area characterized by high HIV prevalence among minority women. The findings will inform the development of an acceptable microbicide that will address the needs of diverse women and their partners. METHODS: This is a mixed methods study of 34 racially and ethnically diverse female participants and 10 male partners in Atlanta, Georgia. Chi-square tests for marginal homogeneity and kappa statistics were calculated to analyze differences between groups on product attributes and use intention. ANOVA was used to examine difference between the treatment groups. Qualitative data were analyzed via constant comparative methodology. RESULTS: Thirty-four out of the original female cohort of 36 completed the questionnaire. Approval of future microbicide development was high at 91.2% (n=31) despite a lack of enthusiasm for the placebo and UC781 formulations. Overall female acceptability was correlated with personal protection motivation (r=1.00, p<0.001). African American women indicated greater likelihood of post-licensure microbicide use (X2(3)=7.9, p=0.048) and ascribed greater importance to its potential protection against HIV (X2(4)=18.7, p=0.001) and its potential for dual protection (protective against STIs and/or pregnancy) compared to white women (X2(4)=11.3, p=0.024). Men and women supported development in the form of an intravaginal ring or suppository. Men were more likely to encourage female adoption of the method if it afforded HIV protection (r=0.935, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although most women agreed that the development of a microbicide was an important endeavor, quantitative and qualitative data indicated they would not use placebo or UC781 due to the objectionable viscosity, odor, and color. Male partners felt the potential protective benefit of a future microbicide product was its most important feature.
Entities:
Keywords:
Clinical trials; HIV/AIDS; Microbicide; Minorities; Product acceptability; Women
Authors: Quarraisha Abdool Karim; Salim S Abdool Karim; Janet A Frohlich; Anneke C Grobler; Cheryl Baxter; Leila E Mansoor; Ayesha B M Kharsany; Sengeziwe Sibeko; Koleka P Mlisana; Zaheen Omar; Tanuja N Gengiah; Silvia Maarschalk; Natasha Arulappan; Mukelisiwe Mlotshwa; Lynn Morris; Douglas Taylor Journal: Science Date: 2010-07-19 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Sara J Whitehead; Peter H Kilmarx; Kelly Blanchard; Chomnad Manopaiboon; Supaporn Chaikummao; Barbara Friedland; Jullapong Achalapong; Mayuree Wankrairoj; Philip Mock; Sombat Thanprasertsuk; Jordan W Tappero Journal: AIDS Date: 2006-11-14 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Patrick F Kiser; Alamelu Mahalingam; Judit Fabian; Eric Smith; Festo R Damian; Jennifer J Peters; David F Katz; Hoda Elgendy; Meredith R Clark; David R Friend Journal: J Pharm Sci Date: 2012-02-22 Impact factor: 3.534
Authors: Rochelle K Rosen; Kathleen M Morrow; Alex Carballo-Diéguez; Joanne E Mantell; Susie Hoffman; Fang Gai; Lisa Maslankowski; Wafaa M El-Sadr; Kenneth H Mayer Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Kathleen Morrow; Rochelle Rosen; Linda Richter; Anne Emans; Anna Forbes; Jennifer Day; Neetha Morar; Lisa Maslankowski; Albert T Profy; Cliff Kelly; Salim S Abdool Karim; Kenneth H Mayer Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Brooke E E Montgomery; Paula M Frew; James P Hughes; Jing Wang; Adaora A Adimora; Danielle F Haley; Irene Kuo; Larissa Jennings; Nabila El-Bassel; Sally L Hodder Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2018-06-15 Impact factor: 2.681