Explore the vast range of titles available.

Antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis reduces sexual transmission of HIV. We assessed whether daily oral use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (tenofovir), an antiretroviral, can reduce HIV transmission in injecting drug users. In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled volunteers from 17 drug-treatment clinics in Bangkok, Thailand. Participants were eligible if they were aged 20–60 years, were HIV-negative, and reported injecting drugs during the previous year. We randomly assigned participants (1:1; blocks of four) to either tenofovir or placebo using a computer-generated randomisation sequence. Participants chose either daily directly observed treatment or monthly visits and could switch at monthly visits. Participants received monthly HIV testing and individualised risk-reduction and adherence counselling, blood safety assessments every 3 months, and were offered condoms and methadone treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint was HIV infection, analysed by modified intention-to-treat analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00119106. Between June 9, 2005, and July 22, 2010, we enrolled 2413 participants, assigning 1204 to tenofovir and 1209 to placebo. Two participants had HIV at enrolment and 50 became infected during follow-up: 17 in the tenofovir group (an incidence of 0·35 per 100 person-years) and 33 in the placebo group (0·68 per 100 person-years), indicating a 48·9% reduction in HIV incidence (95% CI 9·6–72·2; p=0·01). The occurrence of serious adverse events was much the same between the two groups (p=0·35). Nausea was more common in participants in the tenofovir group than in the placebo group (p=0·002). In this study, daily oral tenofovir reduced the risk of HIV infection in people who inject drugs. Pre-exposure prophylaxis with tenofovir can now be considered for use as part of an HIV prevention package for people who inject drugs. US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration.

Background While people who inject drugs (PWID) are vulnerable to the adverse outcomes of events like COVID-19, little is known regarding the impact of the current pandemic on PWID. We examine how COVID-19 has affected PWID in New York City across four domains: substance use, risk behaviors, mental health, and service utilization. Methods As part of a randomized trial to improve access to HCV treatment for PWID, we recruited 165 participants. Eligibility criteria included detectable HCV RNA and recent drug injection. The present cross-sectional analysis is based on a subsample of 106 participants. We compared responses between two separate samples: 60 participants interviewed prior to the pandemic (pre-COVID-19 sample) and 46 participants interviewed during the pandemic (COVID-19 sample). We also assessed differences by study group [accessible care (AC) and usual care (UC)]. Results Compared to the pre-COVID-19 sample, those interviewed during COVID-19 reported higher levels of mental health issues, syringe reuse, and alcohol consumption and greater reductions in syringe-service programs and buprenorphine utilization. In the analysis conducted by study group, the UC group reported significantly higher injection risk behaviors and lower access to buprenorphine treatment during COVID-19, while during the same period, the AC group reported lower levels of substance use and injection risk behaviors. Conclusion The current study provides insight on how COVID-19 has negatively affected PWID. Placing dispensing machines of harm-reduction supplies in communities where PWID live and increasing secondary exchange, mobile services, and mail delivery of supplies may help maintain access to lifesaving supplies during big events, such as COVID-19. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03214679. Registered July 11 2017. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03214679 .

The Thai phase 3 HIV vaccine trial RV 144 showed modest efficacy of a vaccine against HIV acquisition. Baseline variables of age, sex, marital status, and risk did not modify vaccine efficacy. We did a post-hoc analysis of the trial's data to investigate behavioural risk and efficacy every 6 months after vaccination. RV 144 was a randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled efficacy trial testing the combination of the HIV vaccines ALVAC-HIV (vCP1521) and AIDSVAX B/E to prevent HIV infection or reduce setpoint viral load. Male and female volunteers aged 18–30 years were recruited from the community. In this post-hoc analysis of the modified intention-to-treat population (16 395 participants), HIV risk behaviour was assessed with a self-administered questionnaire at the time of initial vaccination in the trial and every 6 months thereafter for 3 years. We classified participants' behaviour as low, medium, or high risk. Both the acquisition endpoint and the early viral-load endpoint were examined for interactions with risk status over time and temporal effects after vaccination. Multiple proportional hazards regression models with treatment and time-varying risk covariates were analysed. Risk of acquisition of HIV was low in each risk group, but 9187 (58·2%) participants reported higher-risk behaviour at least once during the study. Participants classified as high or increasing risk at least once during follow-up were compared with those who maintained low-risk or medium-risk behaviour as a time-varying covariate, and the interaction of risk status and acquisition efficacy was significant (p=0·01), with greater benefit in low-risk individuals. Vaccine efficacy seemed to peak early—cumulative vaccine efficacy was estimated to be 60·5% (95% CI 22–80) through the 12 months after initial vaccination—and declined quickly. Vaccination did not seem to affect viral load in either early or late infections. Future HIV vaccine trials should recognise potential interactions between challenge intensity and risk heterogeneity in both population and treatment effects. The regimen tested in the RV 144 phase 3 trial might benefit from extended immunisation schedules. US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command and Division of AIDS, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, National Institutes of Health.

Background Persons with opioid use disorders who inject drugs (PWID) in the United States (US) face multiple and intertwining health risks. These include interference with consistent access, linkage, and retention to health care including medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), HIV prevention using pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), and testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Most services, when available, including those that address substance misuse, HIV prevention, and STIs, are often provided in multiple locations that may be difficult to access, which further challenges sustained health for PWID. HPTN 094 (INTEGRA) is a study designed to test the efficacy of an integrated, “whole-person” strategy that provides integrated HIV prevention including antiretroviral therapy (ART), PrEP, MOUD, and STI testing and treatment from a mobile health delivery unit (“mobile unit”) with peer navigation compared to peer navigation alone to access these services at brick and mortar locations. Methods HPTN 094 (INTEGRA) is a two-arm, randomized controlled trial in 5 US cities where approximately 400 PWID without HIV are assigned either to an experimental condition that delivers 26 weeks of “one-stop” integrated health services combined with peer navigation and delivered in a mobile unit or to an active control condition using peer navigation only for 26 weeks to the same set of services delivered in community settings. The primary outcomes include being alive and retained in MOUD and PrEP at 26 weeks post-randomization. Secondary outcomes measure the durability of intervention effects at 52 weeks following randomization. Discussion This trial responds to a need for evidence on using a “whole-person” strategy for delivering integrated HIV prevention and substance use treatment, while testing the use of a mobile unit that meets out-of-treatment PWID wherever they might be and links them to care systems and/or harm reduction services. Findings will be important in guiding policy for engaging PWID in HIV prevention or care, substance use treatment, and STI testing and treatment by addressing the intertwined epidemics of addiction and HIV among those who have many physical and geographic barriers to access care. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04804072 . Registered on 18 March 2021.

The advent of direct-acting antivirals for hepatitis C virus (HCV) and limited effectiveness of prevention have generated interest in \"Treatment as Prevention\" (TasP), in which those most likely to transmit HCV (i.e. people who inject drugs [PWID]) are treated to reduced secondary transmission. However, there are scant data regarding the feasibility of treating PWID at high risk for secondary transmission or the optimal approach to treatment delivery. We conducted a 2:1 randomized trial of modified directly-observed (mDOT) versus unobserved HCV treatment with ledipasvir-sofosbuvir daily for 8 weeks among PWID with 36 weeks of follow-up in San Francisco from 2015-2017. We evaluated recruitment-enrollment, treatment completion, end-of-treatment and 12-week response, and reinfection rate. Of 83 individuals eligible for screening, 72 (87.6%) attended the screening visit, 33 were eligible, and 31 enrolled; mean age was 42 years, 81% were male, 74% white. All but one participant (in the mDOT arm) completed treatment and 89.4% of mDOT and 96.6% of unobserved arm visits were attended. HCV was undetectable for 96.8% (30/31) at end of treatment and 89.7% (26/29) 12 weeks later (1 relapse, 1 reinfection), with no differences by arm. Two additional reinfections were subsequently identified, for a reinfection rate of 16.3 (95% CI 5.3-50.5) per 100 person-years of observation. It was feasible to recruit active PWID for HCV treatment and achieve high retention, viral response, and satisfaction with either mDOT or unobserved protocols, supporting treatment of PWID at risk of transmitting HCV to others. The reinfection rate suggests we successfully reached a high-risk population and that successful HCV TasP initiatives may aim to be sufficient in scope to significantly lower prevalence in the community. clinicaltrials.gov NCT02609893.

Peer-driven interventions can be effective in reducing HIV injection risk behaviors among people who inject drugs (PWID). We employed a causal mediation framework to examine the mediating role of recall of intervention knowledge in the relationship between a peer-driven intervention and subsequent self-reported HIV injection-related risk behavior among PWID in the HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 037 study. For each intervention network, the index participant received training at baseline to become a peer educator, while non-index participants and all participants in the control networks received only HIV testing and counseling; recall of intervention knowledge was measured at the 6-month visit for each participant, and each participant was followed to ascertain HIV injection-related risk behaviors at the 12-month visit. We used inverse probability weighting to fit marginal structural models to estimate the total effect (TE) and controlled direct effect (CDE) of the intervention on the outcome. The proportion eliminated (PE) by intervening to remove mediation by the recall of intervention knowledge was computed. There were 385 participants (47% in intervention networks) included in the analysis. The TE and CDE risk ratios for the intervention were 0.47 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28, 0.78] and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.26, 2.06) and the PE was 49%. Compared to participants in the control networks, the peer-driven intervention reduced the risk of HIV injection-related risk behavior by 53%. The mediating role of recall of intervention knowledge accounted for less than 50% of the total effect of the intervention, suggesting that other potential causal pathways between the intervention and the outcome, such as motivation and skill, self-efficacy, social norms and behavior modeling, should be considered in future studies.

We sought to disentangle effects of the components of a peer-education intervention on self-reported injection risk behaviors among people who inject drugs (n = 560) in Philadelphia, US. We examined 226 egocentric groups/networks randomized to receive (or not) the intervention. Peer-education training consisted of two components delivered to the intervention network index individual only: (1) an initial training and (2) “booster” training sessions during 6- and 12-month follow up visits. In this secondary data analysis, using inverse-probability-weighted log-binomial mixed effects models, we estimated the effects of the components of the network-level peer-education intervention upon subsequent risk behaviors. This included contrasting outcome rates if a participant is a network member [non-index] under the network exposure versus under the network control condition (i.e., spillover effects). We found that compared to control networks, among intervention networks, the overall rates of injection risk behaviors were lower in both those recently exposed (i.e., at the prior visit) to a booster (rate ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.61 [0.46–0.82]) and those not recently exposed to it (0.81 [0.67–0.98]). Only the boosters had statistically significant spillover effects (e.g., 0.59 [0.41–0.86] for recent exposure). Thus, both intervention components reduced injection risk behaviors with evidence of spillover effects for the boosters. Spillover should be assessed for an intervention that has an observable behavioral measure. Efforts to fully understand the impact of peer education should include routine evaluation of spillover effects. To maximize impact, boosters can be provided along with strategies to recruit especially committed peer educators and to increase attendance at trainings.Clinical Trials Registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00038688 June 5, 2002.

Background HIV incidence has recently increased among people who inject drugs (PWID) across the United States, with outbreaks occurring in states with long-standing syringe service programs (SSPs) including Massachusetts (MA). Antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an evidence-based HIV prevention strategy recommended for PWID, but uptake in this marginalized population is extraordinarily low. Methods We describe the design and procedures for a National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)-funded (R01) randomized controlled trial (RCT) testing the efficacy of “PrEP for Health,” a multicomponent behavioral intervention to increase PrEP uptake, adherence, and persistence among HIV-negative PWID attending SSPs in two areas of the U.S. Northeast that are heavily affected by injection-related HIV transmission. Participants are equally randomized to receive the “PrEP for Health” intervention (involving individually tailored HIV and PrEP education, motivational interviewing, problem-solving skills and planning, and ongoing navigation support) or an enhanced standard of care (eSOC) control condition involving a brief educational video on the utility of PrEP for HIV prevention. Co-primary outcomes are PrEP uptake (using medical/pharmacy records) and adherence (using tenofovir quantification in hair samples); a secondary outcome is PrEP persistence (using medical/pharmacy records) over 12 months. Major assessments occur at baseline, 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up visits. Planned analyses will examine intervention efficacy, specific hypothesized conceptual mediators of the intervention effect (e.g., self-perceived HIV risk; PrEP knowledge, interest in use, motivation, and behavioral skills) and epidemiologically linked moderators (e.g., age; gender; condomless vaginal or anal sex). Discussion Findings from our extensive preliminary research with the study population revealed that a multicomponent, theory-based intervention targeting PrEP knowledge, motivation, self-efficacy, behavioral skills, and structural barriers to PrEP access is urgently needed for PWID who are at risk of HIV acquisition. We also learned that SSPs represent a highly acceptable service setting for delivering such interventions. In this study, we are evaluating the efficacy of the “PrEP for Health” intervention. If efficacious, findings from our implementation evaluation could help guide its dissemination to diverse SSPs and possibly other community-based settings accessed by this population. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT04430257, registered June 12, 2020.

HIV transmission in Ukraine is driven in part by unsafe injection drug use and sexual risk behaviors among people who inject drugs. We performed a random-intercept latent transition analysis on responses to 9 binary injection drug use and sexual behavior items from 1195 people who inject drugs with negative HIV status enrolled in a clustered randomized clinical trial of a social network intervention in Odessa, Donetsk, and Nikolayev, Ukraine. We identified 5 baseline classes: “Social injection/equipment-sharing” (11.7%), “Social injection” (25.9%), “High-risk collective preparation/splitting” (17.0%), “Collective preparation/splitting” (11.3%), and “Dealer-facilitated injection” (34.1%). After 12 months, intervention participants were more likely to transition to the “Collective preparation/splitting” class, which featured the fewest risk behaviors. Transitioning from the “Collective preparation/splitting” to the “Social injection/equipment-sharing” class was associated with HIV acquisition for control participants. Research to illuminate the stability of these patterns and how they may benefit from uniquely tailored programming to reduce unsafe behaviors is needed.

The community-based AERLI intervention provided training and education to people who inject drugs (PWID) about HIV and HCV transmission risk reduction, with a focus on drug injecting practices, other injection-related complications, and access to HIV and HCV testing and care. We hypothesized that in such a population where HCV prevalence is very high and where few know their HCV serostatus, AERLI would lead to increased HCV testing. The national multisite intervention study ANRS-AERLI consisted in assessing the impact of an injection-centered face-to-face educational session offered in volunteer harm reduction (HR) centers (\"with intervention\") compared with standard HR centers (\"without intervention\"). The study included 271 PWID interviewed on three occasions: enrolment, 6 and 12 months. Participants in the intervention group received at least one face-to-face educational session during the first 6 months. The primary outcome of this analysis was reporting to have been tested for HCV during the previous 6 months. Statistical analyses used a two-step Heckman approach to account for bias arising from the non-randomized clustering design. This approach identified factors associated with HCV testing during the previous 6 months. Of the 271 participants, 127 and 144 were enrolled in the control and intervention groups, respectively. Of the latter, 113 received at least one educational session. For the present analysis, we selected 114 and 88 participants eligible for HCV testing in the control and intervention groups, respectively. In the intervention group, 44% of participants reported having being tested for HCV during the previous 6 months at enrolment and 85% at 6 months or 12 months. In the control group, these percentages were 51% at enrolment and 78% at 12 months. Multivariable analyses showed that participants who received at least one educational session during follow-up were more likely to report HCV testing, compared with those who did not receive any intervention (95%[CI] = 4.13[1.03;16.60]). The educational intervention AERLI had already shown efficiency in reducing HCV at-risk practices and associated cutaneous complications and also seems to have a positive impact in increasing HCV testing in PWID.