ArticleVaccines2025
Counterfactual Groups to Assess Vaccine or Treatment Efficacy in HIV Prevention Trials in High-Risk Populations in Uganda.
Article in Vaccines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01539226 (A Multi-Centre, Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Safety and Efficacy Trial of a Dapivirine Vaginal Matrix Ring in Healthy HIV-Negative Women), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
A Multi-Centre, Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Safety and Efficacy Trial of a Dapivirine Vaginal Matrix Ring in Healthy HIV-Negative Women
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAssessment of efficacy in HIV prevention trials remains a challenge in the era of widespread use of active controls. We investigated use of counterfactual groups to assess treatment efficacy.
methodsWe used data from placebo arms of two previous HIV prevention efficacy trials (Pro2000 vaginal microbicide trial, 2005-2009: ISRCTN64716212 and dapivirine vaginal ring trial, 2013-2016: NCT01539226) and four observational cohorts (two in each of the periods; (a) during the conduct of a simulated HIV vaccine efficacy trial (SiVET), 2012-2017, and (b) prior to SiVET (2005-2011)) and compared HIV prevention efficacy trial targeted outcomes with SiVETs. SiVET participants were administered a licensed hepatitis B vaccine at 0, 1 and 6 months mimicking an HIV vaccine efficacy trial schedule. Participants were tested for HIV quarterly for one year. The probability of the SiVET assignment conditioned on the measured participants' baseline characteristics were estimated using propensity scores (PS) and matched between SiVET and placebo arm of trials. Similar calculations were repeated for observational cohorts in the pre- and during SiVET periods. We compared HIV incidence rate ratio (IRR) between SiVET and the trials or observational data before and after PS matching.
resultsThis analysis involved data from 3387 participants; observational cohorts before SiVET 1495 (44.2%), placebo arms of previous trials 367 (10.8%), observational cohorts during SiVET conduct 953 (28.1%) and SiVETs 572 (16.9%). Before propensity score matching (PSM), there were significant imbalances in participants' baseline characteristics between SiVET, and all the other studies and HIV incidence was lower in SiVET. After PSM, the participants' characteristics were comparable. The HIV incidence in SiVET was similar to that in the previous trial, IRR = 1.01 95% CI: 0.16-4.70),
conclusionsPSM can be used to create counterfactual groups from other data sources. The best counterfactual group for assessing treatment effect is provided by data collected in the placebo arm of previous trials followed by that from observational data collected concurrently to the current trial (SiVET). Even with PSM, observational data collected prior to the current trial may overestimate treatment effect.
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.