Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29732896›Full record

ReviewAIDS research and human retroviruses2018

Weighing the Evidence of Efficacy of Oral PrEP for HIV Prevention in Women in Southern Africa.

Holly Janes, Lawrence Corey, Gita Ramjee, Lindsay N Carpp, Carl Lombard, Myron S Cohen, Peter B Gilbert, Glenda E Gray

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in AIDS research and human retroviruses, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Masibambane-Ladies Chat: Developing an Online Gender-Enhanced PrEP Information-Motivation Workshop for Young South African Women.AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Holly Janes1 Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center , Seattle, Washington.
Lawrence Corey1 Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center , Seattle, Washington.
Gita Ramjee5 HIV Prevention Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council , Durban, South Africa .
Lindsay N Carpp1 Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center , Seattle, Washington.
Carl Lombard8 Biostatistics Unit, Medical Research Council of South Africa , Cape Town, South Africa .
Myron S Cohen9 Institute for Global Health and Infectious Diseases, University of North Carolina , Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Peter B Gilbert1 Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center , Seattle, Washington.
Glenda E Gray10 Perinatal HIV Research Unit, University of the Witwatersrand, Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital , Johannesburg, South Africa .
University of Washington · USFred Hutch Cancer Center · USSouth African Medical Research Council · ZAUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

LOC: HIV Vaccine Trials NetworkUM1AI068614 · NIAID · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Dan H. Barouch, Lawrence Corey · 2011 to 2026
$1175.6M
SDMC: HIV Vaccine Trials NetworkUM1AI068635 · NIAID · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Peter B. Gilbert, Yunda Huang · 2011 to 2026
$385.9M
NIAID NIH HHS UM1 AI068614NIAID NIH HHS UM1 AI068635
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As oral tenofovir-based regimens for preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) are adopted as standard of care for HIV prevention, their utilization in clinical trials among women in southern Africa will require an accurate estimate of oral PrEP efficacy in this population. This information is critical for women in choosing this prevention strategy, and in public health policy making. Estimates of the efficacy of oral PrEP regimens containing tenofovir have varied widely across trials that enrolled women, with some studies reporting high efficacy and others reporting no efficacy. Although poor adherence is strongly associated with lack of efficacy, other factors, such as mode of transmission (sexual vs. parenteral), predominant HIV subtype (C vs. non-C), intensity of exposure, and percentage of stable serodiscordant couples, may also contribute to the variation in efficacy estimates. In this article, we evaluate the evidence for PrEP efficacy in women and propose potential explanations for the observed differences in efficacy among studies. Our review emphasizes the need to continue to refine estimates of efficacy and effectiveness of tenofovir-based oral PrEP so as to best develop the next generation of HIV prevention tools, and to inform public policies directed toward HIV prevention.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAfrica, SouthernAnti-HIV AgentsDisease Transmission, InfectiousFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansPre-Exposure ProphylaxisTenofovirTreatment OutcomeAnti-HIV AgentsTenofoviradherenceHIV preventionoral PrEP efficacypreexposure prophylaxissouthern African women

Identifiers

PMID29732896
PMCPMC6080090
OpenAlexW2799755558

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.