Ariane van der Straten1, Elizabeth T Montgomery, Petina Musara, Juliane Etima, Sarita Naidoo, Nicole Laborde, Miriam Hartmann, Lisa Levy, Thola Bennie, Helen Cheng, Jeanna Piper, Cynthia I Grossman, Jeanne Marrazzo, Barbara Mensch. 1. aWomen's Global Health Imperative (WGHI), RTI International bCenter for AIDS Prevention Studies (CAPS), University of California, San Francisco, California, USA cUniversity of Zimbabwe-University of California San Francisco Collaborative Research Programme, Harare, Zimbabwe dMakerere University-Johns Hopkins University Research Collaboration, Kampala, Uganda eHIV Prevention Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Durban, South Africa fFHI360, Durham, North Carolina, USA gDesmond Tutu HIV Centre, Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa hNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Division of AIDS iNational Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland jUniversity of Washington, Division of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Seattle, Washington kPopulation Council, New York, New York, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In VOICE, a phase IIB trial of daily oral and vaginal tenofovir for HIV prevention, at least 50% of women receiving active products had undetectable tenofovir in all plasma samples tested. MTN-003D, an ancillary study using in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs), together with retrospective disclosure of plasma tenofovir pharmacokinetic results, explored adherence challenges during VOICE. METHODS: We systematically recruited participants with pharmacokinetic data (median six plasma samples), categorized as low (0%, N = 79), inconsistent (1-74%, N = 28) or high (≥75%; N = 20) on the basis of frequency of tenofovir detection. Following disclosure of pharmacokinetic results, reactions were captured and adherence challenges systematically elicited; IDIs and FGDs were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded and thematically analysed. RESULTS: We interviewed 127 participants from South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe. The most common reactions to pharmacokinetic results included surprise (41%; low pharmacokinetic), acceptance (39%; inconsistent pharmacokinetic) and happiness (65%; high pharmacokinetic). On the basis of participants' explanations, we developed a typology of adherence patterns: noninitiation, discontinuation, misimplementation (resulting from visit-driven use, variable taking, modified dosing or regimen) and adherence. Fear of product side effects/harm was a frequent concern, fuelled by stories shared among participants. Although women with high pharmacokinetic levels reported similar concerns, several described strategies to overcome challenges. Women at all pharmacokinetic levels suggested real-time drug monitoring and feedback to improve adherence and reporting. CONCLUSION: Retrospective provision of pharmacokinetic results seemingly promoted candid discussions around nonadherence and study participation. The effect of real-time drug monitoring and feedback on adherence and accuracy of reporting should be evaluated in trials.
OBJECTIVES: In VOICE, a phase IIB trial of daily oral and vaginal tenofovir for HIV prevention, at least 50% of women receiving active products had undetectable tenofovir in all plasma samples tested. MTN-003D, an ancillary study using in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs), together with retrospective disclosure of plasma tenofovir pharmacokinetic results, explored adherence challenges during VOICE. METHODS: We systematically recruited participants with pharmacokinetic data (median six plasma samples), categorized as low (0%, N = 79), inconsistent (1-74%, N = 28) or high (≥75%; N = 20) on the basis of frequency of tenofovir detection. Following disclosure of pharmacokinetic results, reactions were captured and adherence challenges systematically elicited; IDIs and FGDs were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded and thematically analysed. RESULTS: We interviewed 127 participants from South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe. The most common reactions to pharmacokinetic results included surprise (41%; low pharmacokinetic), acceptance (39%; inconsistent pharmacokinetic) and happiness (65%; high pharmacokinetic). On the basis of participants' explanations, we developed a typology of adherence patterns: noninitiation, discontinuation, misimplementation (resulting from visit-driven use, variable taking, modified dosing or regimen) and adherence. Fear of product side effects/harm was a frequent concern, fuelled by stories shared among participants. Although women with high pharmacokinetic levels reported similar concerns, several described strategies to overcome challenges. Women at all pharmacokinetic levels suggested real-time drug monitoring and feedback to improve adherence and reporting. CONCLUSION: Retrospective provision of pharmacokinetic results seemingly promoted candid discussions around nonadherence and study participation. The effect of real-time drug monitoring and feedback on adherence and accuracy of reporting should be evaluated in trials.
Authors: Terrence F Blaschke; Lars Osterberg; Bernard Vrijens; John Urquhart Journal: Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol Date: 2011-09-19 Impact factor: 13.820
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: Robert M Grant; Javier R Lama; Peter L Anderson; Vanessa McMahan; Albert Y Liu; Lorena Vargas; Pedro Goicochea; Martín Casapía; Juan Vicente Guanira-Carranza; Maria E Ramirez-Cardich; Orlando Montoya-Herrera; Telmo Fernández; Valdilea G Veloso; Susan P Buchbinder; Suwat Chariyalertsak; Mauro Schechter; Linda-Gail Bekker; Kenneth H Mayer; Esper Georges Kallás; K Rivet Amico; Kathleen Mulligan; Lane R Bushman; Robert J Hance; Carmela Ganoza; Patricia Defechereux; Brian Postle; Furong Wang; J Jeff McConnell; Jia-Hua Zheng; Jeanny Lee; James F Rooney; Howard S Jaffe; Ana I Martinez; David N Burns; David V Glidden Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-11-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael C Thigpen; Poloko M Kebaabetswe; Lynn A Paxton; Dawn K Smith; Charles E Rose; Tebogo M Segolodi; Faith L Henderson; Sonal R Pathak; Fatma A Soud; Kata L Chillag; Rodreck Mutanhaurwa; Lovemore Ian Chirwa; Michael Kasonde; Daniel Abebe; Evans Buliva; Roman J Gvetadze; Sandra Johnson; Thom Sukalac; Vasavi T Thomas; Clyde Hart; Jeffrey A Johnson; C Kevin Malotte; Craig W Hendrix; John T Brooks Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jared M Baeten; Deborah Donnell; Patrick Ndase; Nelly R Mugo; James D Campbell; Jonathan Wangisi; Jordan W Tappero; Elizabeth A Bukusi; Craig R Cohen; Elly Katabira; Allan Ronald; Elioda Tumwesigye; Edwin Were; Kenneth H Fife; James Kiarie; Carey Farquhar; Grace John-Stewart; Aloysious Kakia; Josephine Odoyo; Akasiima Mucunguzi; Edith Nakku-Joloba; Rogers Twesigye; Kenneth Ngure; Cosmas Apaka; Harrison Tamooh; Fridah Gabona; Andrew Mujugira; Dana Panteleeff; Katherine K Thomas; Lara Kidoguchi; Meighan Krows; Jennifer Revall; Susan Morrison; Harald Haugen; Mira Emmanuel-Ogier; Lisa Ondrejcek; Robert W Coombs; Lisa Frenkel; Craig Hendrix; Namandjé N Bumpus; David Bangsberg; Jessica E Haberer; Wendy S Stevens; Jairam R Lingappa; Connie Celum Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Elizabeth T Montgomery; Ariane van der Straten; Jonathan Stadler; Miriam Hartmann; Busisiwe Magazi; Florence Mathebula; Nicole Laborde; Lydia Soto-Torres Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2015-05
Authors: Elizabeth E Tolley; Polly F Harrison; Els Goetghebeur; Kathleen Morrow; Robert Pool; Doug Taylor; Stephanie N Tillman; Ariane van der Straten Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2010-10
Authors: Zoe Duby; Barbara Mensch; Miriam Hartmann; Elizabeth Montgomery; Imelda Mahaka; Linda-Gail Bekker; Ariane van der Straten Journal: Int J Sex Health Date: 2017-03-27
Authors: Elizabeth T Montgomery; Jonathan Stadler; Sarita Naidoo; Ariana W K Katz; Nicole Laborde; Morgan Garcia; Krishnaveni Reddy; Leila E Mansoor; Juliane Etima; Chifundo Zimba; Miria Chitukuta; Lydia Soto-Torres Journal: AIDS Date: 2018-07-17 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Miriam Hartmann; Michele Lanham; Thesla Palanee-Phillips; Florence Mathebula; Elizabeth E Tolley; Dean Peacock; Laura Pascoe; Seth Zissette; Sarah T Roberts; Danielle Wagner; Ellen Wilson; Asha Ayub; Rose Wilcher; Elizabeth T Montgomery Journal: AIDS Educ Prev Date: 2019-10
Authors: Barbara S Mensch; Elizabeth R Brown; Karen Liu; Jeanne Marrazzo; Zvavahera Mike Chirenje; Kailazarid Gomez; Jeanna Piper; Karen Patterson; Ariane van der Straten Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2016-11
Authors: Kate M Guthrie; Joseph L Fava; Sara E Vargas; Rochelle K Rosen; Julia G Shaw; Erna M Kojic; Anthony S Ham; Lisa C Rohan; David Katz; Anacecilia Panameño; Christopher Colleran; David F Friend; Karen W Buckheit; Robert W Buckheit Journal: AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses Date: 2020-11-03 Impact factor: 2.205
Authors: Monica Gandhi; Pamela M Murnane; Peter Bacchetti; Richard Elion; Michael A Kolber; Stephanie E Cohen; Howard Horng; Alexander Louie; Karen Kuncze; Catherine A Koss; Peter L Anderson; Susan Buchbinder; Albert Liu Journal: AIDS Date: 2017-10-23 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Iván C Balán; Rebecca Giguere; William Brown; Alex Carballo-Diéguez; Stephanie Horn; Craig W Hendrix; Mark A Marzinke; Ratiya Pamela Kunjara Na Ayudhya; Karen Patterson; Jeanna M Piper; Ian McGowan; Javier R Lama; Ross D Cranston Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2018-03