Dobromir Dimitrov1,2, James R Moore1, Daniel Wood1, Kate M Mitchell3, Maoji Li1, James P Hughes1,4, Deborah J Donnell1, Sharon Mannheimer5, Timothy H Holtz6,7, Robert M Grant8, Marie-Claude Boily3. 1. Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle. 2. Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Washington, Seattle. 3. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, United Kingdom. 4. Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle. 5. Harlem Hospital and Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York. 6. Human Immuno Virus/Sexually transmitted diseases Research Program, Thailand Ministry of Public Health-US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Collaboration, Nonthaburi. 7. Division of Human Immuno Virus/AIDS Prevention, US CDC, Atlanta, Georgia. 8. School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 067/Alternative Dosing to Augment PrEP Pill Taking (ADAPT) Study evaluated the feasibility of daily and nondaily human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) regimens among high-risk populations, including men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women, in Bangkok, Thailand and Harlem, New York. We used a mathematical model to predict the efficacy and effectiveness of different dosing regimens. METHODS: An individual-based mathematical model was used to simulate annual HIV incidence among MSM cohorts. PrEP efficacy for covered sex acts, as defined in the HPTN 067/ADAPT protocol, was estimated using subgroup efficacy estimates from the preexposure prophylaxis initiative (iPrEx) trial. Effectiveness was estimated by comparison of the HIV incidence with and without PrEP use. RESULTS: We estimated that PrEP was highly protective (85%-96% efficacy across regimens and sites) for fully covered acts. PrEP was more protective for partially covered acts in Bangkok (71%-88% efficacy) than in Harlem (62%-81% efficacy). Our model projects 80%, 62%, and 68% effectiveness of daily, time-driven, and event-driven PrEP for MSM in Harlem compared with 90%, 85%, and 79% for MSM in Bangkok. Halving the efficacy for partially covered acts decreases effectiveness by 8-9 percentage points in Harlem and by 5-9 percentage points in Bangkok across regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that PrEP was more effective among MSM in Thailand than in the United States as a result of more fully covered sex acts and more pills taken around partially covered acts. Overall, nondaily PrEP was less effective than daily PrEP, especially in the United States where the sex act coverage associated with daily use was substantially higher.
BACKGROUND: The HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 067/Alternative Dosing to Augment PrEP Pill Taking (ADAPT) Study evaluated the feasibility of daily and nondaily human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) regimens among high-risk populations, including men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women, in Bangkok, Thailand and Harlem, New York. We used a mathematical model to predict the efficacy and effectiveness of different dosing regimens. METHODS: An individual-based mathematical model was used to simulate annual HIV incidence among MSM cohorts. PrEP efficacy for covered sex acts, as defined in the HPTN 067/ADAPT protocol, was estimated using subgroup efficacy estimates from the preexposure prophylaxis initiative (iPrEx) trial. Effectiveness was estimated by comparison of the HIV incidence with and without PrEP use. RESULTS: We estimated that PrEP was highly protective (85%-96% efficacy across regimens and sites) for fully covered acts. PrEP was more protective for partially covered acts in Bangkok (71%-88% efficacy) than in Harlem (62%-81% efficacy). Our model projects 80%, 62%, and 68% effectiveness of daily, time-driven, and event-driven PrEP for MSM in Harlem compared with 90%, 85%, and 79% for MSM in Bangkok. Halving the efficacy for partially covered acts decreases effectiveness by 8-9 percentage points in Harlem and by 5-9 percentage points in Bangkok across regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that PrEP was more effective among MSM in Thailand than in the United States as a result of more fully covered sex acts and more pills taken around partially covered acts. Overall, nondaily PrEP was less effective than daily PrEP, especially in the United States where the sex act coverage associated with daily use was substantially higher.
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: Robert M Grant; Peter L Anderson; Vanessa McMahan; Albert Liu; K Rivet Amico; Megha Mehrotra; Sybil Hosek; Carlos Mosquera; Martin Casapia; Orlando Montoya; Susan Buchbinder; Valdilea G Veloso; Kenneth Mayer; Suwat Chariyalertsak; Linda-Gail Bekker; Esper G Kallas; Mauro Schechter; Juan Guanira; Lane Bushman; David N Burns; James F Rooney; David V Glidden Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2014-07-22 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Robert M Grant; Sharon Mannheimer; James P Hughes; Yael Hirsch-Moverman; Avelino Loquere; Anupong Chitwarakorn; Marcel E Curlin; Maoji Li; K Rivet Amico; Craig W Hendrix; Peter L Anderson; Bonnie J Dye; Mark A Marzinke; Estelle Piwowar-Manning; Laura McKinstry; Vanessa Elharrar; Michael Stirratt; James F Rooney; Susan H Eshleman; Janet M McNicholl; Frits van Griensven; Timothy H Holtz Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2018-05-17 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Peter L Anderson; David V Glidden; Albert Liu; Susan Buchbinder; Javier R Lama; Juan Vicente Guanira; Vanessa McMahan; Lane R Bushman; Martín Casapía; Orlando Montoya-Herrera; Valdilea G Veloso; Kenneth H Mayer; Suwat Chariyalertsak; Mauro Schechter; Linda-Gail Bekker; Esper Georges Kallás; Robert M Grant Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2012-09-12 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Jean-Michel Molina; Catherine Capitant; Bruno Spire; Gilles Pialoux; Laurent Cotte; Isabelle Charreau; Cecile Tremblay; Jean-Marie Le Gall; Eric Cua; Armelle Pasquet; François Raffi; Claire Pintado; Christian Chidiac; Julie Chas; Pierre Charbonneau; Constance Delaugerre; Marie Suzan-Monti; Benedicte Loze; Julien Fonsart; Gilles Peytavin; Antoine Cheret; Julie Timsit; Gabriel Girard; Nicolas Lorente; Marie Préau; James F Rooney; Mark A Wainberg; David Thompson; Willy Rozenbaum; Veronique Doré; Lucie Marchand; Marie-Christine Simon; Nicolas Etien; Jean-Pierre Aboulker; Laurence Meyer; Jean-François Delfraissy Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-12-01 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: Jeffrey W Eaton; Nicolas A Menzies; John Stover; Valentina Cambiano; Leonid Chindelevitch; Anne Cori; Jan A C Hontelez; Salal Humair; Cliff C Kerr; Daniel J Klein; Sharmistha Mishra; Kate M Mitchell; Brooke E Nichols; Peter Vickerman; Roel Bakker; Till Bärnighausen; Anna Bershteyn; David E Bloom; Marie-Claude Boily; Stewart T Chang; Ted Cohen; Peter J Dodd; Christophe Fraser; Chaitra Gopalappa; Jens Lundgren; Natasha K Martin; Evelinn Mikkelsen; Elisa Mountain; Quang D Pham; Michael Pickles; Andrew Phillips; Lucy Platt; Carel Pretorius; Holly J Prudden; Joshua A Salomon; David A M C van de Vijver; Sake J de Vlas; Bradley G Wagner; Richard G White; David P Wilson; Lei Zhang; John Blandford; Gesine Meyer-Rath; Michelle Remme; Paul Revill; Nalinee Sangrujee; Fern Terris-Prestholt; Meg Doherty; Nathan Shaffer; Philippa J Easterbrook; Gottfried Hirnschall; Timothy B Hallett Journal: Lancet Glob Health Date: 2013-12-10 Impact factor: 26.763
Authors: Kate M Mitchell; Dobromir Dimitrov; James P Hughes; Fan Xia; Deborah Donnell; K Rivet Amico; Kevin Bokoch; Anupong Chitwarakorn; Linda-Gail Bekker; Timothy H Holtz; Sharon Mannheimer; Robert M Grant; Marie-Claude Boily Journal: AIDS Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 4.177