PrEParing for long-acting injectable PrEP in the South: perspectives from healthcare providers in Georgia.

New modalities of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) such as long-acting injectable PrEP (LAI-PrEP) promise increased prevention of HIV transmission; however, similar biomedical interventions have not been met with universal adoption by healthcare providers or populations most affected by HIV. This qualitative study explores healthcare provider considerations for the rollout of LAI-PrEP. Eleven key-informant in-depth interviews were conducted with clinicians who prescribe daily oral PrEP. Participants reviewed a currently proposed LAI regimen and were asked to reflect on its implications for their clinical practice. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically coded, with results organized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). All participants expressed interest in prescribing LAI-PrEP and anticipated that at least some patients would be interested. Participants identified characteristics of the intervention, inner intervention setting, and outer intervention setting that will be influential in bringing LAI-PrEP to scale. Clinicians in the South have unique insights into the challenges of and opportunities for successful rollout of future PrEP regimens. Bringing these insights into a CFIR framework highlights the nuances surrounding LAI-PrEP, including structural concerns such as cost barriers and access to in-person healthcare services. It is critical to address these challenges to ensure successful implementation of new PrEP formulations.

Projected Impact of Concurrently Available Long-Acting Injectable and Daily-Oral Human Immunodeficiency Virus Preexposure Prophylaxis: A Mathematical Model.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable (LAI) human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is reportedly efficacious, although full trial results have not been published. We used a dynamic network model of HIV transmission among men who have sex with men to assess the population impact of LAI-PrEP when available concurrently with daily-oral (DO) PrEP. METHODS: The reference model represents the current HIV epidemiology and DO-PrEP coverage (15% among those with behavioral indications for PrEP) among men who have sex with men in the southeastern United States. Primary analyses investigated varied PrEP uptake and proportion selecting LAI-PrEP. Secondary analyses evaluated uncertainty in pharmacokinetic efficacy and LAI-PrEP persistence relative to DO-PrEP. RESULTS: Compared with the reference scenario, if 50% chose LAI-PrEP, 4.3% (95% simulation interval, -7.3% to 14.5%) of infections would be averted over 10 years. The impact of LAI-PrEP is slightly greater than that of the DO-PrEP-only regimen, based on assumptions of higher adherence and partial protection after discontinuation. If the total PrEP initiation rate doubled, 17.1% (95% simulation interval, 6.7%-26.4%) of infections would be averted. The highest population-level impact occurred when LAI-PrEP uptake and persistence improved. CONCLUSIONS: If LAI-PrEP replaces DO-PrEP, its availability will modestly improve the population impact. LAI-PrEP will make a more substantial impact if its availability drives higher total PrEP coverage, or if persistence is greater for LAI-PrEP.