| Literature DB >> 33181534 |
Christina Farr Zuend1, Laura Noël-Romas1,2, Sarah Hoger2, Stuart McCorriser3, Garrett Westmacott3, Jeanne Marrazzo4, Sharon L Hillier5,6, Charlene Dezzutti5,6, Kathleen Squires7, Katherine E Bunge5,6, Adam Burgener1,2,8.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The antiretroviral-based dapivirine vaginal ring reduced HIV risk among women in phase III clinical trials. However, limited data exists on the impact of dapivirine on the vaginal microenvironment in adolescents.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33181534 PMCID: PMC7924934 DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000002751
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AIDS ISSN: 0269-9370 Impact factor: 4.632
Participant characteristics.
| Placebo ( | Dapivirine ( | |||||
| Baseline ( | Follow-up visitsa ( | Baseline ( | Follow-up visitsa ( | |||
| Primary partner ( | 4 (50%) | 8 (50%) | >0.9999 | 18 (66.7%) | 28 (52.8%) | 0.2403 |
| Vaginal sex last 30 days (all) ( | 3 (37.5%) | 8 (50%) | 0.6792 | 15 (55.6%) | 25 (47.2%) | 0.4852 |
| Vaginal sex with condom last 30 days ( | 3 (37.5%) | 7 (43.8%) | >0.9999 | 14 (51.8%) | 24 (45.3%) | 0.6381 |
| Vaginal sex without condom last 30 days ( | 2 (25%) | 5 (31.3%) | >0.9999 | 8 (29.6%) | 14 (26.4%) | 0.7933 |
| Oral sex last 30 days (receptive) ( | 3 (37.5%) | 3 (18.8%) | 0.3618 | 10 (37.0%) | 21 (38.9%) | >0.999 |
| Anal sex last 30 days ( | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | N/A | 1 (3.7%) | 1 (1.9%) | N/A |
| Ring use last 30 days ( | N/A | 16 (100%) | N/A | 53 (98.1%) | >0.9999b | |
Follow-up visits were pooled for each treatment arm.
Fisher's exact test comparing ring use between placebo and dapivirine arms. All other P values represent Fisher's exact tests comparing baseline versus all follow-up visits in each arm.
Fig. 1Host proteome changes in cervicovaginal mucus over time in adolescent girls using dapivirine and placebo vaginal rings.
Biofunctions associated with dapivirine and placebo vaginal ring use.
| Arm | Comparison | Pathway | Proteins | |
| Dapivirine | Baseline versus visit 1 | Necrosis | ASAH1, BPI, CAMP, CAPN1, CAST, CDH1, MMP8, MMP9, PEBP1, PSMB1, SERPINB4, TF, TPD52 | 7.34E-06 (−2.035) |
| Dapivirine | Baseline versus visit 1 | Degranulation of cells | ACTN1, ASAH1, BPI, CAMP, CAPN1, CDH1, LTA4H, MMP8, MMP9, PEBP1, PSMB1, TF | 4.64E-13 (−1.025) |
| Dapivirine | Baseline versus visit 1 | Angiogenesis | BPI, CAMP, CAPN1, CDH1, MMP8, MMP9, TF | 1.83E-04 (−0.798) |
| Dapivirine | Baseline versus visit 1 | Cell movement of leukocytes | APBB1IP, CAMP, CAST, CDH1, MMP8, MMP9 | 5.20E-04 (−0.865) |
| Dapivirine | Baseline versus visit 1 | Quantity of granulocytes | ARHGDIB, CAMP, MMP8, MMP9, TF | 3.64E-05 (1.89) |
| Dapivirine | Baseline versus visit 1 | Inflammation of body cavity | CAMP, CDH1, MMP8, MMP9, PSMB1, SERPINB13, TF | 2.04E-04 (2.188) |
| Placebo | Baseline versus visit 1 | Cell movement | ACTR2, ACTR3, ARPC2, ATP5F1B, CALML3, IGLV3-1 | 4.56E-03 (−2.224) |
| Placebo | Baseline versus visit 1 | Degranulation of neutrophils | ACTR2, CAND1, PRDX4, QSOX1 | 6.74E-05 (NA) |
| Placebo | Baseline versus visit 1 | Organization of cytoplasm | ACTR2, ACTR3, ARPC2, ATP5F1B, CALML3 | 4.10E-03 (−1.612) |
Canonical pathways associated with dapivirine or placebo vaginal ring use.
| Arm | Comparison | Pathway | Proteins | |
| Dapivirine | Baseline versus visit 1 | ILK signaling | ACTN1, CDH1, MMP9 | 5.89E-04 |
| Dapivirine | Baseline versus visit 1 | Leukocyte extravasation signaling | ACTN1, MMP8, MMP9 | 6.61E-04 |
| Placebo | Baseline versus visit 1 | Remodeling of epithelial adherens junctions | ACTR2, ACTR3, ARPC2 | 4.17E-06 |
| Placebo | Baseline versus visit 1 | FcÎ3 receptor-mediated phagocytosis in macrophages and monocytes | ACTR2, ACTR3, ARPC2 | 1.10E-05 |
| Placebo | Baseline versus visit 1 | fMLP signalling in neutrophils | ACTR2, ACTR3, ARPC2 | 2.09E-05 |
| Placebo | Baseline versus visit 1 | CD28 signaling in T Helper cells | ACTR2, ACTR3, ARPC2 | 2.29E-05 |
| Placebo | Baseline versus visit 1 | Integrin signalling | ACTR2, ACTR3, ARPC2 | 1.26E-04 |
Fig. 2Vaginal microbial proteome in adolescents using dapivirine or placebo vaginal rings.
Fig. 3Functional microbiome differences associated with dapivirine and placebo vaginal ring use in adolescent girls.
Fig. 4Host and functional microbiome differences based on reported condom use in the past 30 days.