Trial reportAIDS research and human retroviruses2015
Simultaneous Evaluation of Safety, Acceptability, Pericoital Kinetics, and Ex Vivo Pharmacodynamics Comparing Four Rectal Microbicide Vehicle Candidates.
Trial report in AIDS research and human retroviruses, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining the Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of a Rectally Administered IQP-0528 Gel for HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis: A First-In-Human Study.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2021Trial
- A Comparative Pre-Phase I Study of the Impact of Gel Vehicle Volume on Distal Colon Distribution, User Experience, and Acceptability.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2017Trial
- A Phase 1 Randomized, Blinded Comparison of the Pharmacokinetics and Colonic Distribution of Three Candidate Rectal Microbicide Formulations of Tenofovir 1% Gel with Simulated Unprotected Sex (CHARM-02).AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2015Trial
- Mucosal Responses to Zika Virus Infection in Cynomolgus Macaques.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Pre-Clinical Evaluation of Tenofovir and Tenofovir Alafenamide for HIV-1 Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis in Foreskin Tissue.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Topical Microbicides in HIV Prevention: State of the Promise.Annual review of medicine · 2020Review
- Transgender women on oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis have significantly lower tenofovir and emtricitabine concentrations when also taking oestrogen when compared to cisgender men.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2019Article
- HIV Antiretroviral Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis: Development Challenges and Pipeline Promise.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2018Article
- Comparison of Dapivirine Vaginal Gel and Film Formulation Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics (FAME 02B).AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2017Article
- Feasibility of radiolabeled small molecule permeability as a quantitative measure of microbicide candidate toxicity.Contraception · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) of HIV infection with tenofovir-containing regimens is effective, but plagued by poor adherence in some studies. Options for safe, effective, and acceptable PrEP products, especially for men and women at risk of HIV via receptive anal intercourse (RAI), are needed. We performed a randomized, partially blinded, first-in-human evaluation of four candidate rectal microbicide vehicles-aqueous gel, aqueous fluid, lipid gel, and lipid fluid-to select a prototype for further clinical development. Eight seronegative participants received three doses of each product with each dose separated by at least 2 weeks: one dose was given alone without simulated RAI in clinic, another dose was followed by simulated RAI in clinic, and another dose was self-administered at home in the context of RAI with a partner. Assessments included safety, acceptability, colon histology, ex vivo HIV infectivity of colon tissue explants, and colonic luminal distribution of vehicle and HIV surrogates. Adverse events were all mild and mainly sigmoidoscopy associated. There were minor differences in colon distribution of products and little effect of RAI. Vehicle distribution covered 95% (±7% standard deviation) of the distribution of an HIV surrogate in the colonic lumen. The lipid fluid vehicle increased HIV colon tissue infectability 5-fold [log10 p24 0.68 (95% confidence interval 0.08, 1.28)] and aqueous gel provided 6-fold protection [log10 p24 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.20, 1.41)] compared to no product baseline. Colon permeability of lipid vehicles was more than 10-fold greater than aqueous vehicles. All products received similar acceptability ratings, though trends favored the gel products. Intensive simultaneous assessment of safety and toxicity, luminal and tissue distribution, ex vivo HIV infectivity, and product acceptability in relevant sexual contexts provided clear differentiation among candidate gels very early in product development. We selected the aqueous gel for further development as a rectal microbicide vehicle.
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.