Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24282559›Full record

ReviewPloS one2013

Analytic review of modeling studies of ARV Based PrEP interventions reveals strong influence of drug-resistance assumptions on the population-level effectiveness.

Dobromir Dimitrov, Marie-Claude Boily, Elizabeth R Brown, Timothy B Hallett

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. How could preventive therapy affect the prevalence of drug resistance? Causes and consequences.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2015
    Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Dobromir DimitrovVaccine & Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, United States of America ; Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Marie-Claude Boily
Elizabeth R Brown
Timothy B Hallett
Imperial College London · GBUniversity of Washington · USUniversity of Washington Applied Physics Laboratory · US

Funding

Statistical and Data Management Center (SDMC): Microbicide Trials NetworkUM1AI068615 · NIAID · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI BROWN, ELIZABETH RENATA · 2011 to 2021
$66.5M
Leadership for HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks; Microbicide Trials NetworkU01AI068615 · NIAID · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI RICHARDSON, BARBRA A · 2006 to 2010
$20.4M
Medical Research Council MR/K010174/1NIAID NIH HHS 5 U01 AI068615-03NIAID NIH HHS U01 AI068615NIAID NIH HHS UM1 AI068615
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFour clinical trials have shown that oral and topical pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) based on tenofovir may be effective in preventing HIV transmission. The expected reduction in HIV transmission and the projected prevalence of drug resistance due to PrEP use vary significantly across modeling studies as a result of the broad spectrum of assumptions employed. Our goal is to quantify the influence of drug resistance assumptions on the predicted population-level impact of PrEP.

methodsAll modeling studies which evaluate the impact of oral or topical PrEP are reviewed and key assumptions regarding mechanisms of generation and spread of drug-resistant HIV are identified. A dynamic model of the HIV epidemic is developed to assess and compare the impact of oral PrEP using resistance assumptions extracted from published studies. The benefits and risks associated with ten years of PrEP use are evaluated under identical epidemic, behavioral and intervention conditions in terms of cumulative fractions of new HIV infections prevented, resistance prevalence among those infected with HIV, and fractions of infections in which resistance is transmitted.

resultsPublished models demonstrate enormous variability in resistance-generating assumptions and uncertainty in parameter values. Depending on which resistance parameterization is used, a resistance prevalence between 2% and 44% may be expected if 50% efficacious oral PrEP is used consistently by 50% of the population over ten years. We estimated that resistance may be responsible for up to a 10% reduction or up to a 30% contribution to the fraction of prevented infections predicted in different studies.

conclusionsResistance assumptions used in published studies have a strong influence on the projected impact of PrEP. Modelers and virologists should collaborate toward clarifying the set of resistance assumptions biologically relevant to the PrEP products which are already in use or soon to be added to the arsenal against HIV.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, ViralAnti-HIV AgentsFemaleHIVHIV InfectionsHumansMaleModels, TheoreticalAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

PMID24282559
PMCPMC3840039
OpenAlexW2104078551

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.