ReviewCurrent opinion in HIV and AIDS2012
Rectal microbicide development.
Review in Current opinion in HIV and AIDS, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Full depth measurement of tenofovir transport in rectal mucosa using confocal Raman spectroscopy and optical coherence tomography.Drug delivery and translational research · 2018Article
- Gut Microbiota Linked to Sexual Preference and HIV Infection.EBioMedicine · 2016Article
- Hypothetical Rectal Microbicide Acceptability and Factors Influencing It among Men Who Have Sex with Men in Tianjin, China.PloS one · 2016Article
- Adherence to rectal gel use among mainly ethnic minority young men who have sex with men during a 3-month placebo gel trial: implications for microbicide research.AIDS and behavior · 2014Article
- Preparing for rectal microbicides: sociocultural factors affecting product uptake among potential South American users.American journal of public health · 2014Article
- Silencing sexually transmitted infections: topical siRNA-based interventions for the prevention of HIV and HSV.Infectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology · 2014Review
- Rectal pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP).Antiviral research · 2013Review
- Rectal transmission of transmitted/founder HIV-1 is efficiently prevented by topical 1% tenofovir in BLT humanized mice.PloS one · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewIndividuals practicing unprotected receptive anal intercourse are at particularly high risk of HIV infection. Men who have sex with men (MSM) in the developed and developing world continue to have disproportionate and increasing levels of HIV infection. The past few years have seen important progress in demonstrating the efficacy of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), vaginal microbicides, and treatment as prevention, but there has also been significant progress in the development of rectal microbicides. The purpose of this review is to summarize the status of rectal microbicide research and to identify opportunities, challenges, and future directions in this important field of HIV prevention. RECENT
findingsRecent phase 1 rectal microbicide studies have characterized the safety, acceptability, compartmental pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of both UC781 and tenofovir gels. The tenofovir gel formulation used in vaginal studies was not well tolerated in the rectum and newer rectal-specific formulations have been developed and evaluated in phase 1 studies. SUMMARY: Complex phase 1 studies have provided important data on candidate rectal microbicides. Tenofovir gel is poised to move into phase 2 evaluation and it is possible that a phase 2B/3 effectiveness study could be initiated in the next 2-3 years.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.