Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26575147›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in HIV and AIDS2016

The preexposure prophylaxis revolution; from clinical trials to programmatic implementation.

Nelly R Mugo, Kenneth Ngure, Michael Kiragu, Elizabeth Irungu, Nduku Kilonzo

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in HIV and AIDS, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Nelly R MugoaCenter for Clinical Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya bDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA cPartners in Health Research and Development, Thika dDepartment of Public Health, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Juja eLVCT-Health fNational AIDS Control Council, Nairobi, Kenya.
Kenneth Ngure
Michael Kiragu
Elizabeth Irungu
Nduku Kilonzo
Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology · KEKenya Medical Research Institute · KELVCT Health · KENational Aids Control Council · KEPartners for Health and Development in Africa · KE

Funding

Optimizing Antiretroviral-Based HIV Prevention for HIV Serodiscordant CouplesR01MH095507 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BAETEN, JARED · 2011 to 2020
$6.1M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH095507
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewAn investment in preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) delivery must have public health impact in reducing HIV infections. Sustainable delivery of PrEP requires policy, integration of services, and synergy with other existing HIV prevention programs. This review discusses key policy and programmatic considerations for implementation and scale up of PrEP in Africa. RECENT

findingsPrEP delivery has been delayed by concerns about adherence and delivery in 'real world' settings. Demonstration projects and clinical service delivery models are providing evidence of PrEP effectiveness with an impact much higher than that found in randomized clinical trials. Data confirm that PrEP uptake, adherence, and retention has been high, more so by persons who perceive themselves at high risk for HIV infection, and PrEP is well tolerated. PrEP delivery is more than dispensation of a pill and programs should address other risk drivers, which differ by population. In Africa, barriers to PrEP uptake and adherence include stigma among MSM and low HIV risk perception among young women. Additional data have provided insight into optimal points of service delivery, provider training requirements and quality assurance needs. Of the 2 million new HIV infections in 2014, 70% were in Africa. PrEP use is not lifelong, and use limited to periods of risk may be both effective and cost-effective for the continent. SUMMARY: HIV prevention programs should determine strategies to identify those at substantial risk for HIV infection, formulate and deliver PrEP in combination with interventions that target social drivers of HIV vulnerability specific to each population. Policy guidance for optimal combination of interventions and service delivery avenues, clinical protocols, health infrastructure requirements are required. Cost-effectiveness and efficiency data are essential for policy guidance to navigate ethical questions over use of antiretroviral therapy for HIV-negative individuals when treatment coverage has not been attained in many parts of Africa. Countries need to invest in purposeful advocacy at both local and global forums. Failure to implement PrEP will be a failure to protect future generations.

Indexed as

AfricaAnti-HIV AgentsChemopreventionCost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery of Health CareDisease Transmission, InfectiousFemaleHealth PolicyHIV InfectionsHumansMalePre-Exposure ProphylaxisTreatment OutcomeAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

PMID26575147
PMCPMC4900687
OpenAlexW2205792302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.