Pre-exposure prophylaxis to prevent the acquisition of HIV-1 infection (PROUD): effectiveness results from the pilot phase of a pragmatic open-label randomised trial

Sheena McCormack, David T Dunn, Monica Desai, David I Dolling, Mitzy Gafos, Richard Gilson, Ann K Sullivan, Amanda Clarke, Iain Reeves, Gabriel Schembri, Nicola Mackie, Christine Bowman, Charles J Lacey, Vanessa Apea, Michael Brady, Julie Fox, Stephen Taylor, Simone Antonucci, Saye H Khoo, James Rooney, Anthony Nardone, Martin Fisher, Alan McOwan, Andrew N Phillips, Anne M Johnson, Brian Gazzard, Owen N Gill, Sheena McCormack, David T Dunn, Monica Desai, David I Dolling, Mitzy Gafos, Richard Gilson, Ann K Sullivan, Amanda Clarke, Iain Reeves, Gabriel Schembri, Nicola Mackie, Christine Bowman, Charles J Lacey, Vanessa Apea, Michael Brady, Julie Fox, Stephen Taylor, Simone Antonucci, Saye H Khoo, James Rooney, Anthony Nardone, Martin Fisher, Alan McOwan, Andrew N Phillips, Anne M Johnson, Brian Gazzard, Owen N Gill

Abstract

Background: Randomised placebo-controlled trials have shown that daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with tenofovir-emtricitabine reduces the risk of HIV infection. However, this benefit could be counteracted by risk compensation in users of PrEP. We did the PROUD study to assess this effect.

Methods: PROUD is an open-label randomised trial done at 13 sexual health clinics in England. We enrolled HIV-negative gay and other men who have sex with men who had had anal intercourse without a condom in the previous 90 days. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive daily combined tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (245 mg) and emtricitabine (200 mg) either immediately or after a deferral period of 1 year. Randomisation was done via web-based access to a central computer-generated list with variable block sizes (stratified by clinical site). Follow-up was quarterly. The primary outcomes for the pilot phase were time to accrue 500 participants and retention; secondary outcomes included incident HIV infection during the deferral period, safety, adherence, and risk compensation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN94465371) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02065986).

Findings: We enrolled 544 participants (275 in the immediate group, 269 in the deferred group) between Nov 29, 2012, and April 30, 2014. Based on early evidence of effectiveness, the trial steering committee recommended on Oct 13, 2014, that all deferred participants be offered PrEP. Follow-up for HIV incidence was complete for 243 (94%) of 259 patient-years in the immediate group versus 222 (90%) of 245 patient-years in the deferred group. Three HIV infections occurred in the immediate group (1·2/100 person-years) versus 20 in the deferred group (9·0/100 person-years) despite 174 prescriptions of post-exposure prophylaxis in the deferred group (relative reduction 86%, 90% CI 64-96, p=0·0001; absolute difference 7·8/100 person-years, 90% CI 4·3-11·3). 13 men (90% CI 9-23) in a similar population would need access to 1 year of PrEP to avert one HIV infection. We recorded no serious adverse drug reactions; 28 adverse events, most commonly nausea, headache, and arthralgia, resulted in interruption of PrEp. We detected no difference in the occurrence of sexually transmitted infections, including rectal gonorrhoea and chlamydia, between groups, despite a suggestion of risk compensation among some PrEP recipients.

Interpretation: In this high incidence population, daily tenofovir-emtricitabine conferred even higher protection against HIV than in placebo-controlled trials, refuting concerns that effectiveness would be less in a real-world setting. There was no evidence of an increase in other sexually transmitted infections. Our findings strongly support the addition of PrEP to the standard of prevention for men who have sex with men at risk of HIV infection.

Funding: MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Public Health England, and Gilead Sciences.

Copyright © 2016 McCormack et al. Open Access article distributed under the terms of CC BY. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trial profile *First to deferred and subsequently to immediate; considered in the deferred group for analyses but continued on pre-exposure prophylaxis. †19 pairs of partners were allocated to the same group (14 to immediate, five to deferred) including six pairs (all assigned to the immediate group) not enrolled concurrently. ‡One participant who was allocated to the deferred group was prescribed immediate pre-exposure prophylaxis in error; he was included in the deferred group for analyses but continued on pre-exposure prophylaxis. §Includes unable to contact, moved away, and non-attendance as no longer at risk. ¶HIV status ascertained if confirmed HIV-positive or HIV-negative test after 48 weeks or after Oct 13, 2014.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Incident HIV infections Left bound for each HIV case represents last non-reactive HIV test; right bound represents first reactive HIV test. The dotted line represents time when participants in the deferred group became eligible for pre-exposure prophylaxis under the original protocol. *Had a stored enrolment sample that tested positive for HIV RNA but was retained in the analysis.

References

    1. Public Health England. HIV in the United Kingdom: 2014 Report. London, 2014.
    1. Nakagawa F, Miners A, Smith CJ. Projected lifetime healthcare costs associated with HIV infection. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0125018.
    1. Phillips AN, Cambiano V, Nakagawa F. Increased HIV incidence in men who have sex with men despite high levels of ART-induced viral suppression: analysis of an extensively documented epidemic. PLoS One. 2013;8:e55312.
    1. Wilson DP. HIV treatment as prevention: natural experiments highlight limits of antiretroviral treatment as HIV prevention. PLoS Med. 2012;9:e1001231.
    1. Brown AE, Nardone A, Delpech VC. WHO ‘Treatment as Prevention’ guidelines are unlikely to decrease HIV transmission in the UK unless undiagnosed HIV infections are reduced. AIDS. 2014;28:281–283.
    1. Grant RM, Lama JR, Anderson PL. Preexposure chemoprophylaxis for HIV prevention in men who have sex with men. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:2587–2599.
    1. Baeten JM, Donnell D, Ndase P. Antiretroviral prophylaxis for HIV prevention in heterosexual men and women. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:399–410.
    1. Thigpen MC, Kebaabetswe PM, Paxton LA. Antiretroviral preexposure prophylaxis for heterosexual HIV transmission in Botswana. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:423–434.
    1. Choopanya K, Martin M, Suntharasamai P. Antiretroviral prophylaxis for HIV infection in injecting drug users in Bangkok, Thailand (the Bangkok Tenofovir Study): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2013;381:2083–2090.
    1. Cassell MM, Halperin DT, Shelton JD, Stanton D. Risk compensation: the Achilles' heel of innovations in HIV prevention? BMJ. 2006;332:605–607.
    1. Underhill K. Preexposure chemoprophylaxis for HIV prevention. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1374–1375.
    1. McCormack S, Fidler S, Fisher M. The British HIV Association/British Association for Sexual Health and HIV Position Statement on pre-exposure prophylaxis in the UK. Int J STD AIDS. 2012;23:1–4.
    1. European Medicines Agency. Reflection paper on the non-clinical and clinical development for oral and topical HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). EMA/171264/2012. London, 2012.
    1. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Evaluating HIV treatment as prevention in the European context. Solna, 2012.
    1. Standards Unit, Microbiology Services, Public Health England. UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations. Sexually Transmitted Infections. London, 2013.
    1. Anderson PL, Glidden DV, Liu A. Emtricitabine-tenofovir concentrations and pre-exposure prophylaxis efficacy in men who have sex with men. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4:151ra25.
    1. Browne OT, Bhandari S. Interpreting and investigating proteinuria. BMJ. 2012;344:e2339.
    1. Asboe D, Aitken C, Boffito M. British HIV Association guidelines for the routine investigation and monitoring of adult HIV-1-infected individuals 2011. HIV Med. 2012;13:1–44.
    1. Sterne JA, Davey Smith G. Sifting the evidence-what's wrong with significance tests? BMJ. 2001;322:226–231.
    1. Buchbinder SP, Glidden DV, Liu AY. HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis in men who have sex with men and transgender women: a secondary analysis of a phase 3 randomised controlled efficacy trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14:468–475.
    1. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical methods in cancer research. Volume 1 — the analysis of case-control studies. International Agency for Research on Cancer; Lyon: 1980.
    1. US Public Health Service. Preexposure prophylaxis for the prevention of HIV infection in the United States–2014: a clinical practice guideline. Atlanta, 2014.
    1. Van Damme L, Corneli A, Ahmed K. Preexposure prophylaxis for HIV infection among African women. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:411–422.
    1. Marrazzo JM, Ramjee G, Richardson BA. Tenofovir-based preexposure prophylaxis for HIV infection among African women. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:509–518.
    1. Aghaizu A, Murphy G, Tosswill J, et al. HIV incidence among people who attend sexual health clinics in England in 2012: estimates using a biomarker for recent infection. BASHH Spring Conference 2015; June 1–3, 2015; Glasgow, UK. Abstract O4.
    1. Antonucci S, Desai M, Dolling D, et al. The UK PROUD PrEP Pilot study: a baseline analysis. 20th International AIDS Conference; July 20–25, 2014; Melbourne, Australia. Abstract THPE197.
    1. van de Vijver DA, Nichols BE, Abbas UL. Preexposure prophylaxis will have a limited impact on HIV-1 drug resistance in sub-Saharan Africa: a comparison of mathematical models. AIDS. 2013;27:2943–2951.
    1. Cambiano V, Miners A, Dunn D, et al. Is pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention cost-effective in men who have sex with men who engage in condomless sex in the UK? BASHH Spring Conference 2015; June 1–3, 2015; Glasgow, UK. Abstract O1.
    1. Molina J-M, Capitant C, Charreau I, et al. On demand PrEP with oral TDF-FTC in MSM: results of the ANRS Ipergay trial. Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Feb 23–26, 2015; Seattle, WA, USA. Abstract 23LB.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit