- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT01033942
Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis in YMSM
Acceptability and Feasibility of a Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Trial With Young Men Who Have Sex With Men (YMSM)
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Phase 2
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Illinois
-
Chicago, Illinois, United States, 60614
- Childrens Memorial Hospital
-
Chicago, Illinois, United States, 60612
- Ruth M Rothstein CORE Center/ John H Stroger Jr Hospital
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Willing and able to independently provide written informed consent;
- Of male gender at birth;
- Between the ages of 18 years and 0 days through 22 years and 364 days at the time of signed informed consent;
- Self-reporting at least one episode of unprotected anal intercourse with a male within the last 12 months at the time of Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) Screening Interview;
- Tests HIV negative at time of screening (using any FDA-approved HIV diagnostic test);
- Willing to provide locator information to study staff;
- Willing to be assigned to any of the three biomedical intervention conditions;
- Does not report intention to relocate out of the study area during the course of the study; and
- Does not have job/other obligations that would require long absences from the area (> 4 weeks at a time).
Exclusion Criteria:
- Transgender (behavioral intervention not targeted toward this population);
- Presence of serious psychiatric symptoms (e.g., active hallucinations);
- Visibly distraught at the time of consent (e.g., suicidal, homicidal, exhibiting violent behavior);
- Intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or other drugs at the time of consent;
- Acute or chronic hepatitis B infection (exclude if hepatitis B surface antigen positive);
- Renal dysfunction (Creatinine Clearance < 75 ml/min); Use Cockcroft-Gault equation: Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) = (140-Age in years) x (Weight in kg) / (72 x serum creatinine) for males
- Any history of bone fractures not explained by trauma;
- Confirmed proteinuria (repeated positive [> 2+] urine dipstick), unless explained by orthostatic proteinuria;
- Confirmed glucosuria (repeated positive [> 1+] urine dipstick) in the presence of normal blood glucose (<120 mg/dL);
- Any Grade 3 toxicity on screening tests/assessments;
- Concurrent participation in an HIV vaccine study or other investigational drug study; or
- Known allergy/sensitivity to the study drug or its components.
- Use of disallowed medications
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: PREVENTION
- Allocation: RANDOMIZED
- Interventional Model: PARALLEL
- Masking: TRIPLE
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
EXPERIMENTAL: FTC/TDF as PrEP
Blinded treatment with FTC (Emtricitabine) and TDf (Tenofovir)Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP); HIV behavioral intervention
|
Subjects receive PrEP and receive clinical follow-up visits every four weeks for 24 weeks.
Behavioral HIV-prevention intervention.
Behavioral and biomedical data will be collected at baseline and every 4 weeks thereafter for 24 weeks.
|
|
PLACEBO_COMPARATOR: Placebo Pill Control
Blinded administration of placebo pill; HIV behavioral intervention
|
Behavioral HIV-prevention intervention.
Behavioral and biomedical data will be collected at baseline and every 4 weeks thereafter for 24 weeks.
Subjects receive placebo and receive clinical follow-up visits every four weeks for 24 weeks.
|
|
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: No Pill Control
Subjects receive HIV behavioral intervention but no pill.
|
Behavioral HIV-prevention intervention.
Behavioral and biomedical data will be collected at baseline and every 4 weeks thereafter for 24 weeks.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Actual Number of Study Visits Completed by 24 Weeks
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
This outcome measure looked at whether the actual number of study visits conducted by 24 weeks differed by treatment group over time.
|
24 weeks
|
|
Acceptability of Size of Pill
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of the Taste of the Pill
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of the Color of the Pill
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of Taking the Pill Everyday
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of Taking Part in the Study
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of Participating in Group Sessions
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of Being Randomly Assigned to a Group
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of Having an HIV Test at Every Visit
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of Risk Reduction Counseling at Every Visit
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of Questions About Sexual Behavior at Every Visit
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of Being Contacted by the Research Team in Between Visits
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of Physical Examination by a Doctor
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Acceptability of Health Clinic for Study Visits
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Self-Report Calendar Data-Week 4
Time Frame: 4 weeks
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the date that subject came in for their current visit and the last date the subject was dispensed medication minus the total number of days the subject records having taken their medication in the last 31 days based on self-report calendar data.
Since each subject is given a 30 day supply of medication at each visit, any days after 30 days are assumed to be missed medication days and are included in the total.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
4 weeks
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Self-Report Calendar Data-Week 8
Time Frame: Week 8
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the date that subject came in for their current visit and the last date the subject was dispensed medication minus the total number of days the subject records having taken their medication in the last 31 days based on self-report calendar data.
Since each subject is given a 30 day supply of medication at each visit, any days after 30 days are assumed to be missed medication days and are included in the total.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
Week 8
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Self-Report Calendar Data-Week 12
Time Frame: Week 12
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the date that subject came in for their current visit and the last date the subject was dispensed medication minus the total number of days the subject records having taken their medication in the last 31 days based on self-report calendar data.
Since each subject is given a 30 day supply of medication at each visit, any days after 30 days are assumed to be missed medication days and are included in the total.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
Week 12
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Self-Report Calendar Data-Week 16
Time Frame: Week 16
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the date that subject came in for their current visit and the last date the subject was dispensed medication minus the total number of days the subject records having taken their medication in the last 31 days based on self-report calendar data.
Since each subject is given a 30 day supply of medication at each visit, any days after 30 days are assumed to be missed medication days and are included in the total.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
Week 16
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Self-Report Calendar Data-Week 20
Time Frame: Week 20
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the date that subject came in for their current visit and the last date the subject was dispensed medication minus the total number of days the subject records having taken their medication in the last 31 days based on self-report calendar data.
Since each subject is given a 30 day supply of medication at each visit, any days after 30 days are assumed to be missed medication days and are included in the total.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
Week 20
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Self-Report Calendar Data-Week 24
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the date that subject came in for their current visit and the last date the subject was dispensed medication minus the total number of days the subject records having taken their medication in the last 31 days based on self-report calendar data.
Since each subject is given a 30 day supply of medication at each visit, any days after 30 days are assumed to be missed medication days and are included in the total.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
Week 24
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Over Time Based on Self-Report Calendar Data
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
The outcome measure presents the least square means from the generalized linear model.
The outcome here is a binary variable that determines whether the subject missed a dose or not.
In a binomial model with logit link, the least squares means are predicted population margins of the logits.
|
24 weeks
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Medication Refill Dates-Week 4
Time Frame: Week 4
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the actual and expected refill dates.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
Week 4
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Medication Refill Dates-Week 8
Time Frame: Week 8
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the actual and expected refill dates.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
Week 8
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Medication Refill Dates-Week 12
Time Frame: Week 12
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the actual and expected refill dates.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
Week 12
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Medication Refill Dates-Week 16
Time Frame: Week 16
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the actual and expected refill dates.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
Week 16
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Medication Refill Dates-Week 20
Time Frame: Week 20
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the actual and expected refill dates.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
Week 20
|
|
Number of Missed Doses Based on Medication Refill Dates-Overall
Time Frame: 20 Weeks
|
Missed doses were calculated as the number of days between the actual and expected refill dates.
Participants were taking only one dose per day and thus, the number of missed doses is the same as the number of missed medication days.
|
20 Weeks
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Tenofovir Plasma Concentrations (mg/mL) Detected at Baseline
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Subjects reporting tenofovir is calculated as those subjects that had a tenofovir plasma concentration greater than zero (BLQ).
Subjects with BLQ+ (<10 ng/mL) were included in this count.
|
Baseline
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Tenofovir Plasma Concentrations (mg/mL) Detected at Week 4
Time Frame: Week 4
|
Subjects reporting tenofovir is calculated as those subjects that had a tenofovir plasma concentration greater than zero (BLQ).
Subjects with BLQ+ (<10 ng/mL) were included in this count.
|
Week 4
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Tenofovir Plasma Concentrations (mg/mL) Detected at Week 8
Time Frame: Week 8
|
Subjects reporting tenofovir is calculated as those subjects that had a tenofovir plasma concentration greater than zero (BLQ).
Subjects with BLQ+ (<10 ng/mL) were included in this count.
|
Week 8
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Tenofovir Plasma Concentrations (mg/mL) Detected at Week 12
Time Frame: Week 12
|
Subjects reporting tenofovir is calculated as those subjects that had a tenofovir plasma concentration greater than zero (BLQ).
Subjects with BLQ+ (<10 ng/mL) were included in this count.
|
Week 12
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Tenofovir Plasma Concentrations (mg/mL) Detected at Week 16
Time Frame: Week 16
|
Subjects reporting tenofovir is calculated as those subjects that had a tenofovir plasma concentration greater than zero (BLQ).
Subjects with BLQ+ (<10 ng/mL) were included in this count.
|
Week 16
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Tenofovir Plasma Concentrations (mg/mL) Detected at Week 20
Time Frame: Week 20
|
Subjects reporting tenofovir is calculated as those subjects that had a tenofovir plasma concentration greater than zero (BLQ).
Subjects with BLQ+ (<10 ng/mL) were included in this count.
|
Week 20
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Tenofovir Plasma Concentrations (mg/mL) Detected at Week 24
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Subjects reporting tenofovir is calculated as those subjects that had a tenofovir plasma concentration greater than zero (BLQ).
Subjects with BLQ+ (<10 ng/mL) were included in this count.
|
Week 24
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Was Away From Home
Time Frame: 24 Weeks
|
24 Weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Was Too Busy With Other Things
Time Frame: 24 Weeks
|
24 Weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Simply Forgot
Time Frame: 24 Weeks
|
24 Weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Had Too Many Study Pills to Take
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
24 weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Wanted to Avoid Side Effects
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
24 weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Did Not Want Others to Notice Participant Was Taking Medications
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
24 weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Had a Change in Daily Routine
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
24 weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Pills Because Participant Felt Like the Study Pill Was Toxic/Harmful
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
24 weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Fell Asleep/Slept Through Dose Time
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
24 weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Felt Sick or Ill
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
24 weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Felt Depressed/Overwhelmed
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
24 weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Ran Out of Study Pills
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
24 weeks
|
|
|
Frequency of Missing Study Pills Because Participant Didn't Think it Was Needed Because he/She Was Not Engaged in Risky Sex
Time Frame: 24 weeks
|
24 weeks
|
|
|
Number of Participants Who Thought They Were on Placebo vs. Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) at Week 4
Time Frame: Week 4
|
Week 4
|
|
|
Number of Participants Who Thought They Were on Placebo vs. Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) at Week 8
Time Frame: Week 8
|
Week 8
|
|
|
Number of Participants Who Thought They Were on Placebo vs. Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) at Week 12
Time Frame: Week 12
|
Week 12
|
|
|
Number of Participants Who Thought They Were on Placebo vs. Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) at Week 16
Time Frame: Week 16
|
Week 16
|
|
|
Number of Participants Who Thought They Were on Placebo vs. Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) at Week 20
Time Frame: Week 20
|
Week 20
|
|
|
Number of Participants Who Thought They Were on Placebo vs. Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) at Week 24
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Week 24
|
|
|
Perceived Risk of Becoming HIV Positive at Week 4
Time Frame: Week 4
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "Because I am in this PrEP study, I am less concerned about becoming HIV positive".
|
Week 4
|
|
Perceived Risk of Becoming HIV Positive at Week 8
Time Frame: Week 8
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "Because I am in this PrEP study, I am less concerned about becoming HIV positive".
|
Week 8
|
|
Perceived Risk of Becoming HIV Positive at Week 12
Time Frame: Week 12
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "Because I am in this PrEP study, I am less concerned about becoming HIV positive".
|
Week 12
|
|
Perceived Risk of Becoming HIV Positive at Week 16
Time Frame: Week 16
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "Because I am in this PrEP study, I am less concerned about becoming HIV positive".
|
Week 16
|
|
Perceived Risk of Becoming HIV Positive at Week 20
Time Frame: Week 20
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "Because I am in this PrEP study, I am less concerned about becoming HIV positive".
|
Week 20
|
|
Perceived Risk of Becoming HIV Positive at Week 24
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "Because I am in this PrEP study, I am less concerned about becoming HIV positive".
|
Week 24
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 4: Willingness to Take a Chance of Getting HIV Infected Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 4
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am more willing to take a chance of getting infected now that I am in this PrEP study".
|
Week 4
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 8: Willingness to Take a Chance of Getting HIV Infected Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 8
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am more willing to take a chance of getting infected now that I am in this PrEP study".
|
Week 8
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 12: Willingness to Take a Chance of Getting HIV Infected Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 12
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am more willing to take a chance of getting infected now that I am in this PrEP study".
|
Week 12
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 16: Willingness to Take a Chance of Getting HIV Infected Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 16
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am more willing to take a chance of getting infected now that I am in this PrEP study".
|
Week 16
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 20: Willingness to Take a Chance of Getting HIV Infected Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 20
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am more willing to take a chance of getting infected now that I am in this PrEP study".
|
Week 20
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 24: Willingness to Take a Chance of Getting HIV Infected Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am more willing to take a chance of getting infected now that I am in this PrEP study."
|
Week 24
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 4: Less Worried About 'Slipping up' Now That PrEP May be Taken Prior to Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: Week 4
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am a lot less worried about 'slipping up' now that PrEP may be taken prior to unprotected sex."
|
Week 4
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 8: Less Worried About 'Slipping up' Now That PrEP May be Taken Prior to Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: Week 8
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am a lot less worried about 'slipping up' now that PrEP may be taken prior to unprotected sex."
|
Week 8
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 12: Less Worried About 'Slipping up' Now That PrEP May be Taken Prior to Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: Week 12
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am a lot less worried about 'slipping up' now that PrEP may be taken prior to unprotected sex."
|
Week 12
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 16: Less Worried About 'Slipping up' Now That PrEP May be Taken Prior to Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: Week 16
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am a lot less worried about 'slipping up' now that PrEP may be taken prior to unprotected sex."
|
Week 16
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 20: Less Worried About 'Slipping up' Now That PrEP May be Taken Prior to Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: Week 20
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am a lot less worried about 'slipping up' now that PrEP may be taken prior to unprotected sex."
|
Week 20
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 24: Less Worried About 'Slipping up' Now That PrEP May be Taken Prior to Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am a lot less worried about 'slipping up' now that PrEP may be taken prior to unprotected sex."
|
Week 24
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 4: Less Worried About Having Unprotected Sex Due to the Availability of PrEP
Time Frame: Week 4
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "The availability of PrEP makes me less worried about having unprotected sex."
|
Week 4
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 8: Less Worried About Having Unprotected Sex Due to the Availability of PrEP
Time Frame: Week 8
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "The availability of PrEP makes me less worried about having unprotected sex."
|
Week 8
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 12: Less Worried About Having Unprotected Sex Due to the Availability of PrEP
Time Frame: Week 12
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "The availability of PrEP makes me less worried about having unprotected sex."
|
Week 12
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 16: Less Worried About Having Unprotected Sex Due to the Availability of PrEP
Time Frame: Week 16
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "The availability of PrEP makes me less worried about having unprotected sex."
|
Week 16
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 20: Less Worried About Having Unprotected Sex Due to the Availability of PrEP
Time Frame: Week 20
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "The availability of PrEP makes me less worried about having unprotected sex."
|
Week 20
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 24: Less Worried About Having Unprotected Sex Due to the Availability of PrEP
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "The availability of PrEP makes me less worried about having unprotected sex."
|
Week 24
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 4: Less Concerned About Unprotected Anal Sex Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 4
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am less concerned about having unprotected anal sex now that I am in this PrEP study."
|
Week 4
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 8: Less Concerned About Unprotected Anal Sex Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 8
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am less concerned about having unprotected anal sex now that I am in this PrEP study."
|
Week 8
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 12: Less Concerned About Unprotected Anal Sex Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 12
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am less concerned about having unprotected anal sex now that I am in this PrEP study."
|
Week 12
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 16: Less Concerned About Unprotected Anal Sex Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 16
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am less concerned about having unprotected anal sex now that I am in this PrEP study."
|
Week 16
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 20: Less Concerned About Unprotected Anal Sex Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 20
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am less concerned about having unprotected anal sex now that I am in this PrEP study."
|
Week 20
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 24: Less Concerned About Unprotected Anal Sex Because Participating in This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I am less concerned about having unprotected anal sex now that I am in this PrEP study."
|
Week 24
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 4: Participant Has Already Risked Getting HIV Infected Through Unprotected Sex While on This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 4
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I have already risked getting infected with HIV through unsafe sex while I've been in this study."
|
Week 4
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 8: Participant Has Already Risked Getting HIV Infected Through Unprotected Sex While on This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 8
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I have already risked getting infected with HIV through unsafe sex while I've been in this study."
|
Week 8
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 12: Participant Has Already Risked Getting HIV Infected Through Unprotected Sex While on This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 12
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I have already risked getting infected with HIV through unsafe sex while I've been on this study."
|
Week 12
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 16: Participant Has Already Risked Getting HIV Infected Through Unprotected Sex While on This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 16
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I have already risked getting infected with HIV through unsafe sex while I've been in this study."
|
Week 16
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 20: Participant Has Already Risked Getting HIV Infected Through Unprotected Sex While on This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 20
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I have already risked getting infected with HIV through unsafe sex while I've been in this study."
|
Week 20
|
|
Perceived HIV Risk Reduction at Week 24: Participant Has Already Risked Getting HIV Infected Through Unprotected Sex While on This PrEP Study
Time Frame: Week 24
|
Participants were asked to state whether or not they strongly disagreed, disagreed, were neutral, agreed, or strongly agreed with the following statement: "I have already risked getting infected with HIV through unsafe sex while I've been in this study."
|
Week 24
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants Reporting No High-Risk Man With Man Sex Acts at Baseline
Time Frame: Baseline
|
A high-risk sex act was defined as an answer of greater than 0 to any of the following questions: With your male HIV positive male partners during the past month: How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? |
Baseline
|
|
Number of Participants Reporting No High-Risk Man With Man Sex Acts at Week 4
Time Frame: Week 4
|
A high-risk sex act was defined as an answer of greater than 0 to any of the following questions: With your male HIV positive male partners during the past month: How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? |
Week 4
|
|
Number of Participants Reporting No High-Risk Man With Man Sex Acts at Week 8
Time Frame: Week 8
|
A high-risk sex act was defined as an answer of greater than 0 to any of the following questions: With your male HIV positive male partners during the past month: How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? |
Week 8
|
|
Number of Participants Reporting No High-Risk Man With Man Sex Acts at Week 12
Time Frame: Week 12
|
A high-risk sex act was defined as an answer of greater than 0 to any of the following questions: With your male HIV positive male partners during the past month: How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? |
Week 12
|
|
Number of Participants Reporting No High-Risk Man With Man Sex Acts at Week 16
Time Frame: Week 16
|
A high-risk sex act was defined as an answer of greater than 0 to any of the following questions: With your male HIV positive male partners during the past month: How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? |
Week 16
|
|
Number of Participants Reporting No High-Risk Man With Man Sex Acts at Week 20
Time Frame: Week 20
|
A high-risk sex act was defined as an answer of greater than 0 to any of the following questions: With your male HIV positive male partners during the past month: How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? |
Week 20
|
|
Number of Participants Reporting No High-Risk Man With Man Sex Acts at Week 24
Time Frame: Week 24
|
A high-risk sex act was defined as an answer of greater than 0 to any of the following questions: With your male HIV positive male partners during the past month: How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have insertive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? How many times did you have receptive anal sex WITHOUT a condom? |
Week 24
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Sybil Hosek, PhD, Adolescent Trials Network
Publications and helpful links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (ESTIMATE)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- ATN 082
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on HIV
-
Duke UniversityGilead SciencesRecruitingHIV Prevention | HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis | HIV Prevention Program | HIV Prevention and Care | HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis UseUnited States
-
Federal University of São PauloGilead SciencesCompleted
-
University of Alabama at BirminghamMobile County Health Deparment; Alabama Department of Public HealthRecruitingHIV | HIV Testing | HIV Linkage to Care | HIV TreatmentUnited States
-
University of Alabama at BirminghamNational Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)RecruitingPrEP | HIV | HIV Prevention | PrEP UptakeUnited States
-
Institute of HIV Research and Innovation Foundation...National Institutes of Health (NIH)RecruitingHIV Prevention | PrEP Adherence | HIV Related StigmaThailand
-
French National Agency for Research on AIDS and...Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS FoundationCompletedPartner HIV Testing | Couple HIV Counseling | Couple Communication | HIV IncidenceCameroon, Dominican Republic, Georgia, India
-
Massachusetts General HospitalNational Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)RecruitingFeasibility | HIV Prevention | PrEP Uptake | Acceptability | HIV Self-testing | Male Partners of HIV-negative Postpartum WomenSouth Africa
-
ANRS, Emerging Infectious DiseasesHopital Universitaire Robert-Debre; Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement and other collaboratorsUnknownHIV | HIV-uninfected Children | Children Exposed to HIVCameroon
-
University of MinnesotaWithdrawnHIV Infections | HIV/AIDS | Hiv | AIDS | Aids/Hiv Problem | AIDS and InfectionsUnited States
-
University of PennsylvaniaNational Institute of Mental Health (NIMH); University of BotswanaRecruitingPregnancy | HIV | Post-partum | HIV Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) AdherenceBotswana
Clinical Trials on coformulated emtricitabine (FTC) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) as PrEP
-
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases...Microbicide Trials NetworkCompleted
-
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases...Microbicide Trials NetworkCompletedHIV InfectionsSouth Africa, Uganda, Zimbabwe
-
Gilead SciencesCompletedChronic Hepatitis BUnited States, Canada, Spain, Singapore, Turkey, Germany, France, Taiwan, Greece, Italy, Poland
-
University of North Carolina, Chapel HillEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development... and other collaboratorsCompleted
-
University of WashingtonBill and Melinda Gates FoundationCompletedHIV Infections | HIV-1 InfectionsKenya, Uganda
-
ANRS, Emerging Infectious DiseasesRecruiting
-
Centers for Disease Control and PreventionGilead Sciences; CDC FoundationCompletedHIV Preexposure Prophylaxis | HIV ChemoprophylaxisUnited States
-
MRC/UVRI and LSHTM Uganda Research UnitLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux... and other collaboratorsNot yet recruiting
-
University of North Carolina, Chapel HillEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development... and other collaboratorsCompletedHIV InfectionUnited States
-
Kirby InstituteGovernment of Western Australia, Department of Health; Western Australia AIDS...CompletedHIV PreventionAustralia