Mirjam J Curno1, Samuela Rossi, Ioannis Hodges-Mameletzis, Rowena Johnston, Matt A Price, Shirin Heidari. 1. *Formerly International AIDS Society, Geneva, Switzerland; †Frontiers, Lausanne, Switzerland; ‡Krebsregister Bern, University of Bern, Switzerland; §World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland; ‖The Foundation for AIDS Research, New York, NY; ¶International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, New York, NY; #Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; and **Inforia, Geneva, Switzerland.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The effect of clinical interventions can differ because of sex/gender. Studies have shown that women are often under-represented in medical research. The aim of this systematic literature review was to characterize women's participation in HIV clinical studies of antiretroviral drugs (ARV), prophylactic vaccines (VAX), and curative strategies (CURE). METHODS: Systematic PubMed searches were conducted to identify ARV, VAX, and CURE studies. Data were extracted on the number of women, date of publication, sources of funding, country of study, and trial phase. Correlates of female participation were assessed. RESULTS: Women represented a median of 19.2% participants in ARV studies (387), 38.1% in VAX studies (53), and 11.1% in CURE studies (104). Funding source was not correlated with the proportion of female participants in VAX and CURE studies but was for ARV studies (P = 0.03). ARV trials funded by private noncommercial sources had the highest proportion of women, whereas publicly funded trials had the lowest female participation (median 16.7%). The median proportion of women in ARV trials that were fully or partially funded by the National Institutes of Health was significantly lower than the median in trials funded by other sources (19.6% vs. 22.3%, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although women comprise nearly half of people living with HIV, they continue to be under-represented in clinical studies. Despite federal policies that have been established to address this, our study shows that publicly funded ARV trials recruit even fewer women than other trials. There is an urgent need to ensure that HIV clinical studies consider sex/gender dimensions.
INTRODUCTION: The effect of clinical interventions can differ because of sex/gender. Studies have shown that women are often under-represented in medical research. The aim of this systematic literature review was to characterize women's participation in HIV clinical studies of antiretroviral drugs (ARV), prophylactic vaccines (VAX), and curative strategies (CURE). METHODS: Systematic PubMed searches were conducted to identify ARV, VAX, and CURE studies. Data were extracted on the number of women, date of publication, sources of funding, country of study, and trial phase. Correlates of female participation were assessed. RESULTS: Women represented a median of 19.2% participants in ARV studies (387), 38.1% in VAX studies (53), and 11.1% in CURE studies (104). Funding source was not correlated with the proportion of female participants in VAX and CURE studies but was for ARV studies (P = 0.03). ARV trials funded by private noncommercial sources had the highest proportion of women, whereas publicly funded trials had the lowest female participation (median 16.7%). The median proportion of women in ARV trials that were fully or partially funded by the National Institutes of Health was significantly lower than the median in trials funded by other sources (19.6% vs. 22.3%, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although women comprise nearly half of people living with HIV, they continue to be under-represented in clinical studies. Despite federal policies that have been established to address this, our study shows that publicly funded ARV trials recruit even fewer women than other trials. There is an urgent need to ensure that HIV clinical studies consider sex/gender dimensions.
Authors: Karine Dubé; Lara Hosey; Kate Starr; Liz Barr; David Evans; Erin Hoffman; Danielle M Campbell; Jane Simoni; Jeremy Sugarman; John Sauceda; Brandon Brown; Karen L Diepstra; Catherine Godfrey; Daniel R Kuritzkes; David A Wohl; Rajesh Gandhi; Eileen Scully Journal: AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 2.205
Authors: Shane D Falcinelli; Bonnie E Shook-Sa; Morgan G Dewey; Sumati Sridhar; Jenna Read; Jennifer Kirchherr; Katherine S James; Brigitte Allard; Simon Ghofrani; Erin Stuelke; Caroline Baker; Nadia R Roan; Joseph J Eron; JoAnn D Kuruc; Catalina Ramirez; Cynthia Gay; Katie R Mollan; David M Margolis; Adaora A Adimora; Nancie M Archin Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2020-11-09 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Laura M Smeaton; Deborah Kacanek; Kateryna Mykhalchenko; Kristine Coughlin; Karin L Klingman; Susan L Koletar; Elizabeth Barr; Ann C Collier Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2020-08-22 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Laura M Smeaton; Emma M Kileel; Beatriz Grinsztejn; Edward M Gardner; Kate Starr; Melissa L Murry; Patrice Desvigne-Nickens; Beverly Alston-Smith; Myron A Waclawiw; Katharine Cooper-Arnold; José V Madruga; Shashi Sangle; Kathleen V Fitch; Markella V Zanni; Pamela S Douglas; Heather J Ribaudo; Steven K Grinspoon; Karin L Klingman Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2020-07-09 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Markella V Zanni; Kathleen Fitch; Corinne Rivard; Laura Sanchez; Pamela S Douglas; Steven Grinspoon; Laura Smeaton; Judith S Currier; Sara E Looby Journal: HIV Clin Trials Date: 2017-03
Authors: Marisha N Wickremsinhe; Margaret O Little; Alice S Carter; Kristen A Sullivan; Anne D Lyerly Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2018-08-20 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Vaishnavi Kannan; Kathleen E Wilkinson; Mereeja Varghese; Sarah Lynch-Medick; Duwayne L Willett; Teresa A Bosler; Ling Chu; Samantha I Gates; M E Blair Holbein; Mallory M Willett; Sharon C Reimold; Robert D Toto Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 4.497