Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31437276›Full record

ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2020

Predicted Effectiveness of Daily and Nondaily Preexposure Prophylaxis for Men Who Have Sex With Men Based on Sex and Pill-taking Patterns From the Human Immuno Virus Prevention Trials Network 067/ADAPT Study.

Dobromir Dimitrov, James R Moore, Daniel Wood, Kate M Mitchell, Maoji Li, James P Hughes, Deborah J Donnell, Sharon Mannheimer, Timothy H Holtz, Robert M Grant and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Dobromir DimitrovVaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle.
James R MooreVaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle.
Daniel WoodVaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle.
Kate M MitchellDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, United Kingdom.
Maoji LiVaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle.
James P HughesVaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle.
Deborah J DonnellVaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle.
Sharon MannheimerHarlem Hospital and Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York.
Timothy H HoltzHuman Immuno Virus/Sexually transmitted diseases Research Program, Thailand Ministry of Public Health-US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Collaboration, Nonthaburi.
Robert M GrantSchool of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Marie-Claude BoilyDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, United Kingdom.
Fred Hutch Cancer Center · USCape Town HVTN Immunology Laboratory / Hutchinson Centre Research Institute of South Africa · ZAImperial College London · GBCancer Research Center · USColumbia University · USMinistry of Public Health · THUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

LOC: HIV Prevention Trials NetworkUM1AI068619 · NIAID · FAMILY HEALTH INTERNATIONAL · PI Sinead Delany-Moretlwe, RAPHAEL J LANDOVITZ · 2011 to 2026
$779.5M
SDMC: HPTN 084 Pregnancy SupplementUM1AI068617 · NIAID · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Elizabeth Renata Brown, Deborah J Donnell · 2011 to 2026
$204.9M
LC: HIV Prevention Trials Network - Laboratory Support for the SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence Study (CoVPN 5002)UM1AI068613 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SUSAN H ESHLEMAN, Mark A Marzinke · 2011 to 2026
$100.2M
Emory HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials UnitUM1AI069418 · NIAID · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Moises Arturo Huaman Joo, Colleen F Kelley · 2012 to 2026
$46.0M
Columbia Partnership for Prevention and Control of HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials UnitUM1AI069470 · NIAID · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI MAGDALENA ELZBIETA SOBIESZCZYK · 2012 to 2026
$44.8M
Medical Research Council MR/R015600/1NIAID NIH HHS UM1 AI068613NIAID NIH HHS UM1 AI068617NIAID NIH HHS UM1 AI068619NIAID NIH HHS UM1 AI069418NIAID NIH HHS UM1 AI069470
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 067/Alternative Dosing to Augment PrEP Pill Taking (ADAPT) Study evaluated the feasibility of daily and nondaily human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) regimens among high-risk populations, including men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women, in Bangkok, Thailand and Harlem, New York. We used a mathematical model to predict the efficacy and effectiveness of different dosing regimens.

methodsAn individual-based mathematical model was used to simulate annual HIV incidence among MSM cohorts. PrEP efficacy for covered sex acts, as defined in the HPTN 067/ADAPT protocol, was estimated using subgroup efficacy estimates from the preexposure prophylaxis initiative (iPrEx) trial. Effectiveness was estimated by comparison of the HIV incidence with and without PrEP use.

resultsWe estimated that PrEP was highly protective (85%-96% efficacy across regimens and sites) for fully covered acts. PrEP was more protective for partially covered acts in Bangkok (71%-88% efficacy) than in Harlem (62%-81% efficacy). Our model projects 80%, 62%, and 68% effectiveness of daily, time-driven, and event-driven PrEP for MSM in Harlem compared with 90%, 85%, and 79% for MSM in Bangkok. Halving the efficacy for partially covered acts decreases effectiveness by 8-9 percentage points in Harlem and by 5-9 percentage points in Bangkok across regimens.

conclusionsOur analysis suggests that PrEP was more effective among MSM in Thailand than in the United States as a result of more fully covered sex acts and more pills taken around partially covered acts. Overall, nondaily PrEP was less effective than daily PrEP, especially in the United States where the sex act coverage associated with daily use was substantially higher.

Indexed as

Anti-HIV AgentsHIV InfectionsPre-Exposure ProphylaxisSexual and Gender MinoritiesFemaleHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleNew YorkThailandUnited StatesAnti-HIV AgentsHIV incidenceHIV preventionmathematical modelpreexposure prophylaxis

Identifiers

PMID31437276
PMCPMC7353329
OpenAlexW2969505955

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.