ArticlePLOS global public health2026
Evaluating the safety of prenatal HIV PrEP use: Perinatal outcomes from three cohort studies in Western Kenya.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Existing data support the safety of daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-based HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use in pregnancy, yet ongoing monitoring is needed. We analyzed data from three recently completed HIV PrEP safety and implementation studies (PrIMA, PrIMA-X, and mWACh-PrEP) that enrolled women who were offered and/or initiated TDF-based HIV PrEP at routine health clinics in Western Kenya to summarize perinatal outcomes following HIV PrEP use in pregnancy. Data were included in the analysis from participants who were ≥ 15 years, HIV-negative, enrolled ≤32 weeks gestation and remained pregnant until at least 24 weeks gestation. We summarized the frequency of each pregnancy outcome (stillbirth, preterm birth, low birthweight, neonatal death, congenital anomalies) by study cohort, HIV PrEP exposure status (any vs. none), and timing of first HIV PrEP exposure (first, second, or third trimester). Poisson regression models were used to assess associations between adverse outcomes and HIV PrEP exposure timing and duration, adjusting for maternal age, primigravity, and clustering by study cohort. A total of N = 4389 women were included in the analysis (29.8% with HIV PrEP exposure). The median age was 24.1 years, and median gestational age at enrollment was 24 weeks. Most women (83.4%) were married and 39.4% had a partner of unknown HIV status. Among HIV PrEP-exposed pregnancies (n = 1310), most initiated HIV PrEP in the second trimester (56.2%). We found no appreciable differences in perinatal outcomes between pregnancies with and without any HIV PrEP exposure, though HIV PrEP-exposed pregnancies had lower frequency of low birthweight (1.9% vs. 2.5%, adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR]=0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.97). Among pregnancies with any HIV PrEP exposure, preterm birth was less frequent among those with any PrEP use in the first trimester (aPR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.42-0.57) and third-trimester (aPR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.61-0.88), compared to those with no PrEP use in those trimesters; low birth weight was also less frequent among in pregnancies with third-trimester HIV PrEP initiation compared to second trimester initiation (aPR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.61-0.88). All other perinatal outcomes were comparable by timing of HIV PrEP exposure. These findings support current guidelines recommending daily oral TDF-based HIV PrEP for pregnant and lactating women at risk of HIV.
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.