Influences on willingness to use vaginal or oral HIV PrEP during pregnancy and breastfeeding in Africa: the multisite MAMMA study

Ariane van der Straten, Julia H Ryan, Krishnaveni Reddy, Juliane Etima, Frank Taulo, Prisca Mutero, Jamilah Taylor, Jeanna Piper, Petina Musara, MTN-041/MAMMA Study Team, Ariane van der Straten, Julia H Ryan, Krishnaveni Reddy, Juliane Etima, Frank Taulo, Prisca Mutero, Jamilah Taylor, Jeanna Piper, Petina Musara, MTN-041/MAMMA Study Team

Abstract

Introduction: Women in sub-Saharan Africa spend a substantial portion of their reproductive lives pregnant and/or breastfeeding (P/BF), yet they have limited options to prevent HIV during these maternal stages. In preparation for phase 3b prevention trials in P/BF women, we explored attitudes about using a vaginal ring or oral pills for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), perceptions of HIV risk during P/BF and key influences on future PrEP use.

Methods: In 2018, we conducted 16 single-sex focus group discussions (FGDs) with community- and clinic-recruited HIV-uninfected women, currently or recently P/BF, aged 18 to 40, and men with (currently or recently) P/BF partners, aged 18+. Participants completed a behavioural questionnaire, viewed an educational video and handled prototype placebo products. FGDs were conducted in local languages and transcribed, coded and analysed, using a socio-ecological framework, for key influences on willingness to use products, HIV risk perceptions and opinions on product attributes.

Results: Of the 128 participants (65 women, 63 men) 75% lived with their partner and 84% had a child. Women reported the most important influencers when P/BF were partners, and all stated that health decisions when P/BF are typically made jointly (e.g. medication use; ante/postnatal and baby care). There was consensus that P/BF women are at high risk for HIV, primarily because of their partner's infidelities, and new prevention options were welcomed. Participants valued multiple options and stated that woman's personal preference would be key to product choice. Anticipated concerns about products included risk of miscarriage, impact on infant development, complications during delivery and adequate production or taste of breastmilk. Specific perceived disadvantages emerged for the ring (e.g. vaginal discomfort, difficulty inserting/removing) and for pills (e.g. nausea/vomiting) that may be exacerbated during pregnancy. Health care providers' (HCPs) knowledge and approval of product use during P/BF was needed to mitigate anticipated fears.

Conclusions: Participants perceived pregnancy and breastfeeding as high HIV risk periods and valued new prevention options. HIV protection of the mother-child dyad, safety of the baby, and ultimately, health of the family were paramount. Endorsement by HCPs and support from partners were key to future product acceptance. Participants recommended involving partners and HCPs in sensitization efforts for future trials.

Keywords: HIV; Truvada pills; acceptability; safety; socio-ecological framework; stigma; vaginal dapivirine ring.

© 2020 The Authors. Journal of the International AIDS Society published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International AIDS Society.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Screenshots from educational video and demonstration placebo study products. The four‐minute educational video (https://vimeo.com/262813431/dd19ece7dc) was presented at midpoint into the FGD, just prior to moving to the section of the discussion on new prevention products. It described briefly the HIV prevention landscape and the two study products (daily oral pills and monthly vaginal ring), including mechanism of action and how each is to be used. Placebo products (as pictured) that were identical looking to the active dosage forms were passed along during the FGDs so participants could touch and feel both. FGDs, focus group discussions.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Socio‐ecological spheres of influences on future use of HIV prevention products during p/BF periods. Sphere of influence on future product use included the mother and baby dyad, the spouse (or male partner or father of the baby) at the closest interpersonal level, followed by family members (mostly grandmother of the baby, siblings and other family members). Institutionally, important stakeholder included health care providers (doctors, nurses, etc.) and religious leaders. At the socio‐structural level, salient influences included pregnant or breastfeeding‐related permissible or forbidden practices, community rumours that fuelled HIV stigma (influencing all levels from socio‐structural to their partner’s opinion of the products), fear of health innovations, such as PrEP, as a manifestation of general medical mistrust, and patriarchal gender norms favouring the sexual double standard. Salient health outcomes aligned with dyadic protection for efficacy, and with safety, for those exposed to PrEP and VR (the woman and the baby), as well as with the maternal stages of pregnancy and lactation.  = perceived facilitators;  = perceived barriers;  = other topics of influence acting either as perceived facilitators or barriers. Pregnant and/or breastfeeding.

References

    1. Microbicide Trials Network . Stakeholders Consultation on MTN‐042: Phase 3B open‐label safety study of the dapivirine vaginal ring and oral PrEP used during pregnancy. South Africa: Johannesburg; 2018. [cited 2019 Oct 29]. Available from:
    1. Organization WH . World Life Expectancy. 2017. [cited 2019 Oct 29]. Available from:
    1. Mugo NR, Heffron R, Donnell D, Wald A, Were EO, Rees H, et al. Partners in prevention HSV/HIV transmission study team. increased risk of HIV‐1 transmission in pregnancy: a prospective study among African HIV‐1‐serodiscordant couples. AIDS. 2011;25(15):1887–95.
    1. Kinuthia J, Richardson BA, Drake AL, Matemo D, Unger JA, McClelland RS, et al. Sexual behavior and vaginal practices during pregnancy and postpartum: implications for HIV prevention strategies. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2017;74(2):142–9.
    1. Drake AL, Wagner A, Richardson B, John‐Stewart G. Incident HIV during pregnancy and postpartum and risk of mother‐to‐child HIV transmission: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. PLoS Med. 2014;11:e1001608.
    1. World Health Organization . WHO Technical Brief: Preventing HIV during pregnancy and breastfeeding in the context of pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017.
    1. Fonner VA, Dalglish SL, Kennedy CE, Baggaley R, O'Reilly KR, Koechlin FM, et al. Effectiveness and safety of oral HIV preexposure prophylaxis for all populations. AIDS. 2016;30(12):1973–83.
    1. Mofenson LM, Baggaley RC, Mameletzis I. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate safety for women and their infants during pregnancy and breastfeeding. AIDS. 2017;31(2):213–32.
    1. Dettinger JC, Kinuthia J, Pintye J, Abuna F, Begnel E, Mugwanya K, et al. Perinatal outcomes following maternal pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use during pregnancy: results from a large PrEP implementation program in Kenya. J Int AIDS Soc. 2019;22:e25378.
    1. Hodges‐Mameletzis I, Fonner VA, Dalal S, Mugo N, Msimanga‐Radebe B, Baggaley R. Pre‐exposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention in women: current status and future directions. Drugs. 2019;79(12):1263–76.
    1. Baeten JM, Palanee‐Phillips T, Brown ER, Schwartz K, Soto‐Torres LE, Govender V, et al. Use of a vaginal ring containing dapivirine for HIV‐1 prevention in women. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(22):2121–32.
    1. Nel A, van Niekerk N, Kapiga S, Bekker LG, Gama C, Gill K, et al. Safety and Efficacy of a dapivirine vaginal ring for HIV prevention in women. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(22):2133–43.
    1. Nel A, van Niekerk N, Van Baelen B, Rosenberg Z. HIV incidence and adherence in DREAM: an open‐label trial of dapivirine vaginal ring. Presented at: 25th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI), March 4‐7, 2018, Boston, MA.
    1. Rossi L.Open‐label study of a vaginal ring for HIV prevention suggests women want and will use it: final results of the HOPE study of the monthly dapivirine ring presented at IAS 2019: EurekAlert! Science News; 2019. [cited 2019 Oct 29]. Available from:
    1. IMPAACT 2009 (DAIDS ID 30020) . Feasibility, acceptability and safety of oral pre‐exposure prophylaxis for primary HIV prevention during pregnancy and breast feeding in adolescents and young women. 2016. [cited 2019 Oct 29]. Available from:
    1. Makanani B, Balkus JE, Palanee‐Philips T, Mbilizi Y, Piper J, Kintu K, et al. Pregnancy incidence and outcomes among women using the dapivirine vaginal ring. Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI), Seattle, WA; 2017.
    1. Mugwanya KK, Hendrix CW, Mugo NR, Marzinke M, Katabira ET, Ngure K, et al. Pre‐exposure prophylaxis use by breastfeeding HIV‐uninfected women: a prospective short‐term study of antiretroviral excretion in breast milk and infant absorption. PLoS Med. 2016;13:e1002132.
    1. Noguchi LM, Hoesley C, Kelly C, Scheckter R, Bunge K, Nel A, et al. Pharmacokinetics of dapivirine transfer into blood plasma, breast milk, and cervicovaginal fluid of lactating women using the dapivirine vaginal ring. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019;63:e01930–18.
    1. Noguchi LM, Montgomery ET, Biggio JR, Hendrix CW, Bogen DL, Hillier SL, et al. Detectable tenofovir levels in breast‐feeding infants of mothers exposed to topical tenofovir. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(9):5616–9.
    1. Montgomery ET, Noguchi LM, Dai JY, Pan J, Biggio J, Hendrix C, et al. Acceptability of and adherence to an antiretroviral‐based vaginal microbicide among pregnant women in the United States. AIDS Behav. 2018;22(2):402–11.
    1. Pintye J, Drake AL, Begnel E, Kinuthia J, Abuna F, Lagat H, et al. Acceptability and outcomes of distributing HIV self‐tests for male partner testing in Kenyan maternal and child health and family planning clinics. AIDS. 2019;33(8):1369–78.
    1. Pulerwitz J, Gortmaker SL, DeJong W. Measuring sexual relationship power in HIV/STD research. Sex Roles. 2000;42:637–60.
    1. Jennifer C, Anne Swindale A, Bilinsky P. Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) for measurement of household food access: indicator guide (v. 3). Washington, DC: Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance Project, Academy for Educational Development; 2007.
    1. RTI International . Workshop: participatory rapid qualitative analysis and capacity building. 2020. [cited 2020 Feb 1]. Available from:
    1. Pintye J, Beima‐Sofie KM, Makabong'O PA, Njoroge A, Trinidad SB, Heffron RA, et al. HIV‐uninfected kenyan adolescent and young women share perspectives on using preexposure prophylaxis during pregnancy. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2018;32(12):538‐44.
    1. Pintye J, Beima‐Sofie KM, Kimemia G, Ngure K, Trinidad SB, Heffron RA, et al. "I Did Not Want to Give Birth to a Child Who has HIV": experiences using PrEP during pregnancy among HIV‐uninfected Kenyan women in HIV‐serodiscordant couples. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2017;76(3):259–65.
    1. Montgomery ET, van der Straten A, Stadler J, Hartmann M, Magazi B, Mathebula F, et al. Male partner influence on women’s HIV prevention trial participation and use of pre‐exposure prophylaxis: the importance of “Understanding”. AIDS Behav. 2015;19(5):784–93.
    1. Hartmann M, Palanee‐Phillips T, O’Rourke S, Adewumi K, Tenza S, Mathebula F, et al. The relationship between vaginal ring use and intimate partner violence and social harms: formative research outcomes from the CHARISMA study in Johannesburg, South Africa. AIDS Care. 2019;31(6):660–66. 10.1080/09540121.2018.1533227
    1. Davey DJ, Farley E, Towriss C, Gomba Y, Bekker L‐G, Gorbach P, et al. Risk perception and sex behaviour in pregnancy and breastfeeding in high HIV prevalence settings: programmatic implications for PrEP delivery. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0197143.
    1. Rwafa T, Shamu S, Christofides N. Relationship power and HIV sero‐status: an analysis of their relationship among low‐income urban Zimbabwean postpartum women. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):792.
    1. Hill LM, Maman S, Groves AK, Moodley D. Social support among HIV‐positive and HIV‐negative adolescents in Umlazi, South Africa: changes in family and partner relationships during pregnancy and the postpartum period. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2015;15:117.
    1. Roberts ST, Khoza N, Rousseau‐Jemwa E, Omollo V, Morton J, Bekker L‐G, et al. “As long as my mother supports me, then I am okay”: family influences on oral PrEP use among adolescent girls and young women in Kenya and South Africa. (IAPAC) Poster presentation, Adherence conference Miami June 17‐19, 2019.
    1. Seidman DL, Weber S, Cohan D. Offering pre‐exposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention to pregnant and postpartum women: a clinical approach. J Int AIDS Soc. 2017;20(S1):24.
    1. van der Straten A, Stadler J, Luecke E, Laborde N, Hartmann M, Montgomery ET. Perspectives on use of oral and vaginal antiretrovirals for HIV prevention: the VOICE‐C qualitative study in Johannesburg, South Africa. J Int AIDS Soc. 2014;17 3 Suppl 2:19146.
    1. Amico KR, Wallace M, Bekker LG, Roux S, Atujuna M, Sebastian E, et al. Experiences with HPTN 067/ADAPT study‐provided open‐label PrEP among women in Cape Town: facilitators and barriers within a mutuality framework. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(5):1361–75.
    1. Vazquez L, Moll AP, Kacin A, Ndlovu NE, Shenoi SV. Perceptions of HIV preexposure prophylaxis among young pregnant women from rural KwaZulu‐Natal, South Africa. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2019;33(5):214–9.
    1. Velloza J.The influence of HIV‐related stigma on PrEP disclosure and adherence over time among AGYW in HPTN 082. 2019 Adherence conference, Miami: Sexual and HIV stigman with PrEP in AGYW: University of Washington; 2019.
    1. Chitukuta M, Duby Z, Katz A, Nakyanzi T, Reddy K, Palanee‐Phillips T, et al. Negative rumours about a vaginal ring for HIV‐1 prevention in sub‐Saharan Africa. Cult Health Sex. 2019;1–16.
    1. Ndinda C, Ndhlovu T, Khalema NE. Conceptions of contraceptive use in rural KwaZulu‐Natal, South Africa: lessons for programming. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017;14(4):353.
    1. Luecke EH, Cheng H, Woeber K, Nakyanzi T, Mudekunye‐Mahaka IC, van der Straten A. Stated product formulation preferences for HIV pre‐exposure prophylaxis among women in the VOICE‐D (MTN‐003D) study. J Int AIDS Soc. 2016;19:20875.
    1. van der Straten A, Shapley‐Quinn MK, Reddy K, Cheng H, Etima J, Woeber K, et al. Favoring “Peace of Mind”: a qualitative study of african women's HIV prevention product formulation preferences from the MTN‐020/ASPIRE trial. AIDS Patient Care STDs. 2017;31(7):305–14.
    1. Minnis AM, Roberts ST, Agot K, Weinrib R, Ahmed K, Manenzhe K, et al. Young women's ratings of three placebo multipurpose prevention technologies for HIV and pregnancy prevention in a randomized, cross‐over study in Kenya and South Africa. AIDS Behav. 2018;22(8):2662–73.
    1. Montgomery ET, van der Straten A, Chitukuta M, Reddy K, Woeber K, Atujuna M, et al. “It’s inside my body and it’s mine”: acceptability and use of a dapivirine vaginal ring in a phase III trial. AIDS. 2017; 31(8):1159–67.
    1. Microbicide Trials Network . MTN‐042: deliver: a study of PrEP and the diapivirine ring in pregnant women. Available from:
    1. Microbicide Trials Network . MTN‐043: be protected—breastfeeding PrEP & ring open‐label trial [cited 2019 Oct 29]. Available from:
    1. Dimitrov D, Boily MC, Marrazzo J, Beigi R, Brown ER. Population‐level benefits from providing effective HIV prevention means to pregnant women in high prevalence settings. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e73770 10.1371/journal.pone.0073770
    1. Mofenson LM. Editorial commentary: risk of HIV acquisition during pregnancy and postpartum: a call for action. J Infect Dis. 2018;218(1):1–4.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever