HIV incidence among women using intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, a copper intrauterine device, or a levonorgestrel implant for contraception: a randomised, multicentre, open-label trial

Evidence for Contraceptive Options and HIV Outcomes (ECHO) Trial Consortium, Khatija Ahmed, Jared M Baeten, Mags Beksinska, Linda-Gail Bekker, Elizabeth A Bukusi, Deborah Donnell, Peter B Gichangi, Kate B Heller, G Justus Hofmeyr, Jessica Justman, Margaret Phiri Kasaro, James Kiarie, Cheryl Louw, Timothy D Mastro, Charles S Morrison, Nelly R Mugo, Gonasagrie Nair, Kavita Nanda, Zelda Nhlabatsi, Maricianah Onono, Thesla Palanee-Phillips, Melanie Pleaner, Helen Rees, Mandisa Singata-Madliki, Caitlin W Scoville, Raesibe Agnes Pearl Selepe, Kathleen Shears, Sydney Sibiya, Jennifer Smit, Petrus S Steyn, Jeffrey Stringer, Douglas Taylor, Katherine K Thomas, Julia D Welch, Evidence for Contraceptive Options and HIV Outcomes (ECHO) Trial Consortium, Khatija Ahmed, Jared M Baeten, Mags Beksinska, Linda-Gail Bekker, Elizabeth A Bukusi, Deborah Donnell, Peter B Gichangi, Kate B Heller, G Justus Hofmeyr, Jessica Justman, Margaret Phiri Kasaro, James Kiarie, Cheryl Louw, Timothy D Mastro, Charles S Morrison, Nelly R Mugo, Gonasagrie Nair, Kavita Nanda, Zelda Nhlabatsi, Maricianah Onono, Thesla Palanee-Phillips, Melanie Pleaner, Helen Rees, Mandisa Singata-Madliki, Caitlin W Scoville, Raesibe Agnes Pearl Selepe, Kathleen Shears, Sydney Sibiya, Jennifer Smit, Petrus S Steyn, Jeffrey Stringer, Douglas Taylor, Katherine K Thomas, Julia D Welch

Abstract

Background: Observational and laboratory studies suggest that some hormonal contraceptive methods, particularly intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-IM), might increase women's susceptibility to HIV acquisition. We aimed to compare DMPA-IM, a copper intrauterine device (IUD), and a levonorgestrel (LNG) implant among African women seeking effective contraception and living in areas of high HIV incidence.

Methods: We did a randomised, multicentre, open-label trial across 12 research sites in eSwatini, Kenya, South Africa, and Zambia. We included HIV-seronegative women aged 16-35 years who were seeking effective contraception, had no medical contraindications to the trial contraceptive methods, agreed to use the assigned method for 18 months, and reported not using injectable, intrauterine, or implantable contraception for the previous 6 months. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive an injection of 150 mg/mL DMPA-IM every 3 months, a copper IUD, or a LNG implant with random block sizes between 15 and 30, stratified by site. Participants were assigned using an online randomisation system, which was accessed for each randomisation by study staff at each site. The primary endpoint was incident HIV infection in the modified intention-to-treat population, including all randomised participants who were HIV negative at enrolment and who contributed at least one HIV test. The primary safety endpoint was any serious adverse event or any adverse event resulting in method discontinuation, until the trial exit visit at 18 months and was assessed in all enrolled and randomly assigned women. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02550067.

Findings: Between Dec 14, 2015, and Sept 12, 2017, 7830 women were enrolled and 7829 were randomly assigned to the DMPA-IM group (n=2609), the copper IUD group (n=2607), or the LNG implant group (n=2613). 7715 (99%) participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (2556 in the DMPA-IM group, 2571 in the copper IUD group, and 2588 in the LNG implant group), and women used their assigned method for 9567 (92%) of 10 409 woman-years of follow-up time. 397 HIV infections occurred (incidence 3·81 per 100 woman-years [95% CI 3·45-4·21]): 143 (36%; 4·19 per 100 woman-years [3·54-4·94]) in the DMPA-IM group, 138 (35%: 3·94 per 100 woman-years [3·31-4·66]) in the copper IUD group, and 116 (29%; 3·31 per 100 woman-years [2·74-3·98]) in the LNG implant group. In the modified intention-to-treat analysis, the hazard ratios for HIV acquisition were 1·04 (96% CI 0·82-1·33, p=0·72) for DMPA-IM compared with copper IUD, 1·23 (0·95-1·59, p=0·097) for DMPA-IM compared with LNG implant, and 1·18 (0·91-1·53, p=0·19) for copper IUD compared with LNG implant. 12 women died during the study: six in the DMPA-IM group, five in the copper IUD group, and one in the LNG implant group. Serious adverse events occurred in 49 (2%) of 2609 participants in the DMPA-IM group, 92 (4%) of 2607 participants in the copper IUD group, and 78 (3%) of 2613 participants in the LNG implant group. Adverse events resulting in discontinuation of the randomly assigned method occurred in 109 (4%) women in the DMPA-IM group, 218 (8%) women in the copper IUD group, and 226 (9%) women in the LNG implant group (p<0·0001 for DMPA-IM vs copper IUD and for DMPA-IM vs LNG implant). 255 pregnancies occurred: 61 (24%) in the DMPA-IM group, 116 (45%) in the copper IUD group, and 78 (31%) in the LNG implant group. 181 (71%) pregnancies occurred after discontinuation of randomly assigned method.

Interpretation: We did not find a substantial difference in HIV risk among the methods evaluated, and all methods were safe and highly effective. HIV incidence was high in this population of women seeking pregnancy prevention, emphasising the need for integration of HIV prevention within contraceptive services for African women. These results support continued and increased access to these three contraceptive methods.

Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, US Agency for International Development and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, South African Medical Research Council, and UN Population Fund. Contraceptive supplies were donated by the Government of South Africa and US Agency for International Development.

Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trial profile DMPA-IM=intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate. IUD=intrauterine device. LNG=levonorgestrel. *Per-site enrolment numbers are detailed in the appendix (p 19). †One enrollee (from South Africa) was discovered 2 days after randomisation to have been younger than 18 years but had entered the trial without parental or guardian consent and was immediately exited.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Contraceptive use by group DMPA-IM=intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate. IUD=intrauterine device. LNG=levonorgestrel. *Other non-hormonal methods accounted for less than 0·1% of contraceptive use during follow-up.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Kaplan-Meier curves for the primary, modified intention-to-treat analysis DMPA-IM=intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate. HR=hazard ratio. IUD=intrauterine device. LNG=levonorgestrel.

References

    1. UNAIDS UNAIDS data 2018. July 26, 2018.
    1. UN, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division World family planning highlights - 2017 (ST/ESA/SER.A/414) 2017.
    1. Darroch J, Sully E, Biddlecom A. Adding it up: investing in contraception and maternal and newborn health. Guttmacher Institute; New York, NY: 2017.
    1. Bertrand JT, Sullivan TM, Knowles EA, Zeeshan MF, Shelton JD. Contraceptive method skew and shifts in method mix in low- and middle-income countries. Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2014;40:144–153.
    1. Tsui AO, Brown W, Li Q. Contraceptive practice in sub-Saharan Africa. Popul Dev Rev. 2017;43(suppl 1):166–191.
    1. Morrison CS, Chen PL, Kwok C. Hormonal contraception and the risk of HIV acquisition: an individual participant data meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2015;12:e1001778.
    1. Polis CB, Curtis KM, Hannaford PC. An updated systematic review of epidemiological evidence on hormonal contraceptive methods and HIV acquisition in women. AIDS. 2016;30:2665–2683.
    1. WHO . Hormonal contraceptive eligibility for women at high risk of HIV. World Health Organization; Geneva: 2017.
    1. Hofmeyr GJ, Morrison CS, Baeten JM. Rationale and design of a multi-center, open-label, randomised clinical trial comparing HIV incidence and contraceptive benefits in women using three commonly-used contraceptive methods (the ECHO study) Gates Open Res. 2017;1:17.
    1. Hapgood JP, Kaushic C, Hel Z. Hormonal contraception and HIV-1 acquisition: biological mechanisms. Endocr Rev. 2018;39:36–78.
    1. UNAIDS, AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition Good participatory practice: guidelines for biomedical HIV prevention trials 2011. 2011.
    1. WHO. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Center for Communication Programs. Information and Knowledge for Optimal Health (INFO). Decision-making tool for family planning clients and providers. 2005.
    1. WHO Department of Reproductive Health and Research. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health/Center for Communication Programs (CCP) Knowledge for Health Project Family planning: a global handbook for providers (2018 update) 2018.
    1. WHO Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 5th ed. 2015.
    1. WHO Selected practice recommendations for contraceptive use, 3rd edn. 2016.
    1. Reproductive Health Access Project Contraception.
    1. WHO Hormonal contraceptive eligibility for women at high risk of HIV. 2017.
    1. Blue SW, Winchell AJ, Kaucher AV. Simultaneous quantitation of multiple contraceptive hormones in human serum by LC-MS/MS. Contraception. 2018;97:363–369.
    1. Cain LE, Cole SR. Inverse probability-of-censoring weights for the correction of time-varying noncompliance in the effect of randomized highly active antiretroviral therapy on incident AIDS or death. Stat Med. 2009;28:1725–1738.
    1. Hernan MA, Hernandez-Diaz S. Beyond the intention-to-treat in comparative effectiveness research. Clin Trials. 2012;9:48–55.
    1. Higgins JA, Smith NK. The sexual acceptability of contraception: reviewing the literature and building a new concept. J Sex Res. 2016;53:417–456.
    1. Singata-Madliki M, Hofmeyr GJ, Carayon-Lefebvre d'Hellencourt F, Lawrie TA. Psychological, behavioural and physiological effects of three long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) methods: protocol for an ancillary study of the ECHO randomised trial. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e019205.
    1. Trussell J, Aiken A, Micks E, Guthrie K. Efficacy, safety, and personal considerations. In: Kowal D, Hatcher RA, Nelson AL, editors. Contraceptive technology. 21st edn. Ayer Company Publishers, Inc; New York, NY: 2018.
    1. Heffron R, Achilles SL, Dorflinger LJ. Pharmacokinetic, biologic and epidemiologic differences in MPA- and NET-based progestin-only injectable contraceptives relative to the potential impact on HIV acquisition in women. Contraception. 2019;99:199–204.
    1. Achilles S, Mhlanga F, Musara P, Poloyac S, Chirenje Z, Hillier S. Misreporting of contraceptive hormone use in clinical research participants. Contraception. 2018;97:346–353.
    1. Pyra M, Lingappa J, Heffron R. Concordance of self-reported hormonal contraceptive use and presence of exogenous hormones in serum among African women. Contraception. 2018;97:357–362.
    1. Polis CB, Phillips SJ, Hillier SL, Achilles SL. Levonorgestrel in contraceptives and multipurpose prevention technologies: does this progestin increase HIV risk or interact with antiretrovirals? AIDS. 2016;30:2571–2576.
    1. Jacobstein R. Liftoff: the blossoming of contraceptive implant use in Africa. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2018;6:17–39.

Source: PubMed

Подписаться