Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26227279›Full record

Trial reportAIDS research and human retroviruses2015

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).

Hiwot Hiruy, Edward J Fuchs, Mark A Marzinke, Rahul P Bakshi, Jennifer C Breakey, Wutyi S Aung, Madhuri Manohar, Chen Yue, Brian S Caffo, Yong Du and 5 more

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

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 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. MTN-017: A Rectal Phase 2 Extended Safety and Acceptability Study of Tenofovir Reduced-Glycerin 1% Gel.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2017
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Lubricant Provides Poor Rectal Mucosal HIV Coverage.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hiwot Hiruy1 Department of Medicine (Clinical Pharmacology), Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland.
Edward J Fuchs1 Department of Medicine (Clinical Pharmacology), Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland.
Mark A Marzinke1 Department of Medicine (Clinical Pharmacology), Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland.
Rahul P Bakshi1 Department of Medicine (Clinical Pharmacology), Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland.
Jennifer C Breakey1 Department of Medicine (Clinical Pharmacology), Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland.
Wutyi S Aung1 Department of Medicine (Clinical Pharmacology), Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland.
Madhuri Manohar1 Department of Medicine (Clinical Pharmacology), Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland.
Chen Yue2 Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health , Baltimore, Maryland.
Brian S Caffo2 Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health , Baltimore, Maryland.
Yong Du3 Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine , Baltimore, Maryland.
Kaleab Z Abebe4 Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Hans M L Spiegel5 HJF-DAIDS, a Division of The Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Contractor to National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health , Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland.
Lisa C Rohan4 Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Ian McGowan4 Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Craig W Hendrix1 Department of Medicine (Clinical Pharmacology), Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland.
Johns Hopkins University · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · USMagee-Womens Research Institute · US

Funding

Topical Antiretrovirals to Prevent Rectal HIV InfectionU19AI082637 · NIAID · MAGEE-WOMEN'S RES INST AND FOUNDATION · PI ROHAN, LISA CENCIA · 2009 to 2013
$11.1M
Clinical Pharmacology Training ProgramT32GM066691 · NIGMS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Matthew Michael Ippolito · 2003 to 2026
$6.4M
NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI082637NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM066691
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CHARM-02 is a crossover, double-blind, randomized trial to compare the safety and pharmacokinetics of three rectally applied tenofovir 1% gel candidate rectal microbicides of varying osmolalities: vaginal formulation (VF) (3111 mOsmol/kg), the reduced glycerin vaginal formulation (RGVF) (836 mOsmol/kg), and an isoosmolal rectal-specific formulation (RF) (479 mOsmol/kg). Participants (n = 9) received a single, 4 ml, radiolabeled dose of each gel twice, once with and once without simulated unprotected receptive anal intercourse (RAI). The safety, plasma tenofovir pharmacokinetics, colonic small molecule permeability, and SPECT/CT imaging of lower gastrointestinal distribution of drug and virus surrogate were assessed. There were no Grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported for any of the products. Overall, there were more Grade 2 adverse events in the VF group compared to RF (p = 0.006) and RGVF (p = 0.048). In the absence of simulated unprotected RAI, VF had up to 3.8-fold greater systemic tenofovir exposure, 26- to 234-fold higher colonic permeability of the drug surrogate, and 1.5- to 2-fold greater proximal migration in the colonic lumen, when compared to RF and RGVF. Similar trends were observed with simulated unprotected RAI, but most did not reach statistical significance. SPECT analysis showed 86% (standard deviation 19%) of the drug surrogate colocalized with the virus surrogate in the colonic lumen. There were no significant differences between the RGVF and RF formulation, with the exception of a higher plasma tenofovir concentration of RGVF in the absence of simulated unprotected RAI. VF had the most adverse events, highest plasma tenofovir concentrations, greater mucosal permeability of the drug surrogate, and most proximal colonic luminal migration compared to RF and RGVF formulations. There were no major differences between RF and RGVF formulations. Simultaneous assessment of toxicity, systemic and luminal pharmacokinetics, and colocalization of drug and viral surrogates substantially informs rectal microbicide product development.

Indexed as

Administration, RectalAdultAnti-HIV AgentsCross-Over StudiesDisease Transmission, InfectiousDouble-Blind MethodDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsGelsHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPlasmaTenofovirUnsafe SexAnti-HIV AgentsGelsTenofovir

Identifiers

PMID26227279
PMCPMC4651050
OpenAlexW1656646027

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.