Potential corporate uses of polygenic indexes: Starting a conversation about the associated ethics and policy issues.

Some commercial firms currently sell polygenic indexes (PGIs) to individual consumers, despite their relatively low predictive power. It might be tempting to assume that because the predictive power of many PGIs is so modest, other sorts of firms-such as those selling insurance and financial services-will not be interested in using PGIs for their own purposes. We argue to the contrary. We build this argument in two ways. First, we offer a very simple model, rooted in economic theory, of a profit-maximizing firm that can gain information about a single consumer's genome. We use the model to show that, depending on the specific economic environment, a firm would be willing to pay for statistically noisy PGIs, even if they allow for only a small reduction in uncertainty. Second, we describe two plausible scenarios in which these different kinds of firms could conceivably use PGIs to maximize profits. Finally, we briefly discuss some of the associated ethics and policy issues. They deserve more attention, which is unlikely to be given until it is first recognized that firms whose services affect a large swath of the public will indeed have incentives to use PGIs.

Cabotegravir for HIV Prevention in Cisgender Men and Transgender Women.

BACKGROUND: Safe and effective long-acting injectable agents for preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection are needed to increase the options for preventing HIV infection. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority trial to compare long-acting injectable cabotegravir (CAB-LA, an integrase strand-transfer inhibitor [INSTI]) at a dose of 600 mg, given intramuscularly every 8 weeks, with daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-emtricitabine (TDF-FTC) for the prevention of HIV infection in at-risk cisgender men who have sex with men (MSM) and in at-risk transgender women who have sex with men. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive one of the two regimens and were followed for 153 weeks. HIV testing and safety evaluations were performed. The primary end point was incident HIV infection. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 4566 participants who underwent randomization; 570 (12.5%) identified as transgender women, and the median age was 26 years (interquartile range, 22 to 32). The trial was stopped early for efficacy on review of the results of the first preplanned interim end-point analysis. Among 1698 participants from the United States, 845 (49.8%) identified as Black. Incident HIV infection occurred in 52 participants: 13 in the cabotegravir group (incidence, 0.41 per 100 person-years) and 39 in the TDF-FTC group (incidence, 1.22 per 100 person-years) (hazard ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.18 to 0.62). The effect was consistent across prespecified subgroups. Injection-site reactions were reported in 81.4% of the participants in the cabotegravir group and in 31.3% of those in the TDF-FTC group. In the participants in whom HIV infection was diagnosed after exposure to CAB-LA, INSTI resistance and delays in the detection of HIV infection were noted. No safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: CAB-LA was superior to daily oral TDF-FTC in preventing HIV infection among MSM and transgender women. Strategies are needed to prevent INSTI resistance in cases of CAB-LA PrEP failure. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; HPTN 083 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02720094.).

Expectations of preventative benefits and risk behaviors in a randomized trial evaluating oral HIV preexposure prophylaxis candidates.

When participants enrolled in an HIV prevention trial hold a preventive misconception (PM) - expectations that experimental interventions will confer protection from HIV infection - they may engage in behaviors that increase their risk of acquiring HIV. This can raise ethical concerns about whether those enrolled in the trial understand the nature of participation and their safety. Consequently, we systematically evaluated the prevalence of PM and its association with risk behaviors in a trial examining three candidate regimens for oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis in which all participants received at least one antiretroviral agent. Overall, trial participants exhibited relatively high preventive expectations that may be associated with an increase in risk behaviors among men who have sex with men. In addition, we identified substantial site variability in PM that necessitates future research to uncover its source. This will allow appropriate measures to be taken to mitigate PM and help ensure that participants have an accurate understanding of the potential risks and benefits of trial participation throughout the course of a trial.

Prioritization of ethical concerns regarding HIV molecular epidemiology by public health practitioners and researchers.

BACKGROUND: HIV molecular epidemiology (HIV ME) can support the early detection of emerging clusters of new HIV infections by combining HIV sequence data routinely obtained during the clinical treatment of people living with HIV with behavioral, geographic, and sociodemographic information. While information about emerging clusters promises to facilitate HIV prevention and treatment efforts, the use of this data also raises several ethical concerns. We sought to assess how those working on the frontlines of HIV ME, specifically public health practitioners (PHPs) and researchers, prioritized these issues. METHODS: Ethical issues were identified through literature review, qualitative in-depth interviews, and stakeholder engagement. PHPs and researchers using HIV ME prioritized the issues using best-worst scaling (BWS). A balanced incomplete block design was used to generate 11 choice tasks each consisting of a sub-set of 5 ethical concerns. In each task, respondents were asked to assess the most and least concerning issue. Data were analyzed using conditional logit, with a Swait-Louviere test of poolability. Latent class analysis was then used to explore preference heterogeneity. RESULTS: In total, 57 respondents completed the BWS experiment May-June 2023 with the Swait-Louviere test indicating that researchers and PHPs could be pooled (p = 0.512). Latent class analysis identified two classes, those highlighting "Harms" (n = 29) (prioritizing concerns about potential risk of legal prosecution, individual harm, and group stigma) and those highlighting "Utility" (n = 28) (prioritizing concerns about limited evidence, resource allocation, non-disclosure of data use for HIV ME, and the potential to infer the directionality of HIV transmission). There were no differences in the characteristics of members across classes. CONCLUSIONS: The ethical issues of HIV ME vary in importance among stakeholders, reflecting different perspectives on the potential impact and usefulness of the data. Knowing these differences exist can directly inform the focus of future deliberations about the policies and practices of HIV ME in the United States.

Do Clinicians Have a Duty to Participate in Pragmatic Clinical Trials?

Clinicians have good moral and professional reasons to contribute to pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs). We argue that clinicians have a defeasible duty to participate in this research that takes place in usual care settings and does not involve substantive deviation from their ordinary care practices. However, a variety of countervailing reasons may excuse clinicians from this duty in particular cases. Yet because there is a moral default in favor of participating, clinicians who wish to opt out of this research must justify their refusal. Reasons to refuse include that the trial is badly designed in some way, that the trial activities will violate the clinician's conscience, or that the trial will impose excessive burdens on the clinician.

Neonatal Survival After Serial Amnioinfusions for Bilateral Renal Agenesis: The Renal Anhydramnios Fetal Therapy Trial.

Importance: Early anhydramnios during pregnancy, resulting from fetal bilateral renal agenesis, causes lethal pulmonary hypoplasia in neonates. Restoring amniotic fluid via serial amnioinfusions may promote lung development, enabling survival. Objective: To assess neonatal outcomes of serial amnioinfusions initiated before 26 weeks' gestation to mitigate lethal pulmonary hypoplasia. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective, nonrandomized clinical trial conducted at 9 US fetal therapy centers between December 2018 and July 2022. Outcomes are reported for 21 maternal-fetal pairs with confirmed anhydramnios due to isolated fetal bilateral renal agenesis without other identified congenital anomalies. Exposure: Enrolled participants initiated ultrasound-guided percutaneous amnioinfusions of isotonic fluid before 26 weeks' gestation, with frequency of infusions individualized to maintain normal amniotic fluid levels for gestational age. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was postnatal infant survival to 14 days of life or longer with dialysis access placement. Results: The trial was stopped early based on an interim analysis of 18 maternal-fetal pairs given concern about neonatal morbidity and mortality beyond the primary end point despite demonstration of the efficacy of the intervention. There were 17 live births (94%), with a median gestational age at delivery of 32 weeks, 4 days (IQR, 32-34 weeks). All participants delivered prior to 37 weeks' gestation. The primary outcome was achieved in 14 (82%) of 17 live-born infants (95% CI, 44%-99%). Factors associated with survival to the primary outcome included a higher number of amnioinfusions (P = .01), gestational age greater than 32 weeks (P = .005), and higher birth weight (P = .03). Only 6 (35%) of the 17 neonates born alive survived to hospital discharge while receiving peritoneal dialysis at a median age of 24 weeks of life (range, 12-32 weeks). Conclusions and Relevance: Serial amnioinfusions mitigated lethal pulmonary hypoplasia but were associated with preterm delivery. The lower rate of survival to discharge highlights the additional mortality burden independent of lung function. Additional long-term data are needed to fully characterize the outcomes in surviving neonates and assess the morbidity and mortality burden. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03101891.

Defining Malaysia's health research ethics system through a stakeholder driven approach.

The need to understand the systems that support ethical health research has long been recognized, but there are limited descriptions of actual health research ethics (HRE) systems. Using participatory network mapping methods, we empirically defined Malaysia's HRE system. 13 Malaysian stakeholders identified 4 overarching and 25 specific HRE system functions and 35 actors internal and 3 external to the Malaysian HRE system responsible for those functions. Functions requiring the most attention were: advising on legislation related to HRE; optimizing research value to society; and defining standards for HRE oversight. Internal actors with the greatest potential for more influence were: the national network of research ethics committees; non-institution-based research ethics committees; and research participants. The World Health Organization, an external actor, had the largest untapped potential for influence overall. In summary, this stakeholder-driven process identified HRE system functions and actors that could be targeted to increase HRE system capacity.

Evaluating the Balance Between Privacy and Access in Digital Information Sharing.

OBJECTIVES: Access to personal health records in an ICU by persons involved in the patient's care (referred to broadly as "family members" below) has the potential to increase engagement and reduce the negative psychologic sequelae of such hospitalizations. Currently, little is known about patient preferences for information sharing with a designated family member in the ICU. We sought to understand the information-sharing preferences of former ICU patients and their family members and to identify predictors of information-sharing preferences. DESIGN: We performed an internet survey that was developed by a broad, multidisciplinary team of stakeholders. Formal pilot testing of the survey was conducted prior to internet survey administration to study subjects. SETTING: Internet survey. SUBJECTS: Subjects included English-speaking adults who had an ICU experience or a family member with ICU experience between 2013 and 2016. We used panel sampling to ensure an ethnically representative sample of the U.S. population. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One thousand five hundred twenty surveys were submitted, and 1,470 were included in analysis. The majority of respondents (93.6%) stated that they would want to share present and past medical history, either all or that related to their ICU stay, with a designated family member of their choosing. The majority (79%) would also want their designated family member to be able to access that information from a home computer. Although most respondents preferred to share all types of information, they indicated varying levels of willingness to share specific types of more sensitive information. Information-sharing preferences did not differ by age, sex, ethnicity, or type of prior experience in the ICU (i.e., patient or family member). CONCLUSIONS: In the context of an ICU admission, sharing personal health information with a person of the patient's choosing appears desirable for most patients and family members. Policies and implementation of regulations should take this into consideration.

Patients' Reactions to Letters Communicating Collateral Findings of Pragmatic Clinical Trials: a National Web-Based Survey.

BACKGROUND: Collateral findings in pragmatic clinical trials are findings that may have implications for patients' health but were not generated to address a trial's primary research questions. It is uncertain how best to communicate these collateral findings to patients. OBJECTIVES: To determine how reactions to a letter communicating collateral findings relate to who signed the letter, the type of finding, or whether the letter specified that the finding arose from a pragmatic clinical trial. RESEARCH DESIGN: Web-based survey experiment using a between-subjects design in which respondents were randomly assigned within education strata to view and respond to 1 of 16 hypothetical scenarios. SUBJECTS: Adults recruited from an online panel constructed from a probability sample of US-based postal addresses. MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the action the respondent would take next (i.e., contact a doctor immediately or something else) and the respondent's emotional reactions (i.e., all positive, all negative, mixed, or none). RESULTS: A total of 4080 respondents had analyzable data. Although some effects were statistically significant (P < .05), none exceeded a prespecified threshold for policy relevance (15 or more percentage points). Ratings of letter clarity and level of understanding were lower for letters that included a description of the clinical trial. CONCLUSIONS: Signatory and level of detail about collateral findings did not substantially affect people's intentions to take the recommended action of contacting their doctor. Deciding whether to include a description of the pragmatic clinical trial requires a trade-off between transparency and more difficulty understanding the contents of the letter.

Real-time ethics engagement in biomedical research: Ethics from bench to bedside.

Biomedical research often raises ethical questions that are usually addressed ad hoc or in retrospective. Real-time ethical engagement as part of research may be better suited to identify ethical issues.

Barriers experienced by organ procurement organizations in implementing the HOPE act and HIV-positive organ donation.

In the seven years since the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act made HIV-positive organ donation to HIV-positive recipients legally permissible in the United States, there have been fewer HIV-positive organ donations than expected. Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) play a key role in the transplant system and barriers at OPOs may be partly responsible for the relatively low number of HIV-positive donors. To understand potential OPO barriers, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 OPO staff members. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a conventional content analytic approach with two coders. OPO staff had high levels of knowledge about HOPE. Many had evaluated referrals of HIV-positive donors and approached families for authorization. Barriers to HIV-positive organ recovery identified included obtaining authorization for donation, potentially disclosing HIV status to next-of-kin, and fear of HIV infection among those engaged in organ recovery. Strategies to overcome these barriers include providing continuing education about the specific tasks required to procure organs from HIV-positive donors, implementing targeted interventions to reduce fear of infection, and developing partnerships with HIV advocacy and care organizations. Given the central role OPOs play, HIV-positive donations are unlikely to occur in significant numbers unless these barriers can be overcome.

Ethics challenges in sharing data from pragmatic clinical trials.

Numerous arguments have been advanced for broadly sharing de-identified, participant-level clinical trials data, and trial sponsors and journals are increasingly requiring it. However, data sharing in pragmatic clinical trials presents ethical challenges related to the use of waivers or alterations of informed consent for some pragmatic clinical trials and corresponding limitations of informed consent to guide sharing decisions; the potential for data sharing in pragmatic clinical trials to present risks not only for individual patient-subjects, but also for health systems and the clinicians within them; sharing of data from electronic health records instead of data newly collected for research purposes; and researchers' limited capacity to control sensitive data within an electronic health record and potential implications of such limits for meeting obligations inherent to Certificates of Confidentiality. These challenges raise questions about the extent to which traditional research ethics governance structures are capable of guiding decisions about pragmatic clinical trial data sharing. This article identifies and examines these ethical challenges for pragmatic clinical trial data sharing. We suggest several areas for future empirical scholarship, including the need to identify patient and public attitudes regarding pragmatic clinical trial data sharing as well as to assess the demand for pragmatic clinical trial data and the correspondingly likely benefit of such sharing. Further conceptual work is also needed to explore how requirements to respect patient-subjects about whom data are shared in the context of pragmatic clinical trials should be understood, particularly in the absence of informed consent for initial research activities, and the appropriate balance between promoting the generation of socially valuable knowledge and respecting autonomy.

Developing a competency framework for health research ethics education and training.

Health research ethics (HRE) training programmes are being developed and implemented globally, often with a goal of increasing local capacity to assure ethical conduct in health-related research. Yet what it means for there to be sufficient HRE capacity is not well-defined, and there is currently no consensus on outcomes that HRE training programmes should collectively intend to achieve. Without defining the expected outcomes, meaningful evaluation of individual participants and programmes is challenging. In this article, we briefly describe the evolution of formal education in HRE, articulate the need for a framework to define outcomes for HRE training programmes, and provide guidance for developing HRE competency frameworks that define outcomes suited to their contexts. We detail critical questions for developing HRE competency frameworks using a six-step process: (1) define the purposes, intended uses and scope of the framework; (2) describe the context in which practice occurs; (3) gather data using a variety of methods to inform the competency framework; (4) translate the data into competencies that can be used in educational programmes; (5) report on the competency development process and results and (6) evaluate and update the competency framework. We suggest that competency frameworks should be feasible to develop using this process, and such efforts promise to contribute to programmatic advancement.

Potential donor characteristics and decisions made by organ procurement organization staff: Results of a discrete choice experiment.

Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) evaluate referrals for deceased organ donation in the United States. Efforts to expand the donor pool, such as the HIV organ policy equity (HOPE) Act that permits transplants from HIV-positive donors to HIV-positive recipients, can only succeed if OPOs pursue referrals. However, relatively little is known about how OPO staff evaluate referrals. To better understand this process, OPO staff completed a discrete choice experiment to quantify the relative importance of seven donor characteristics on the decision to pursue a theoretical donor. Relative importance was defined by Partworth utility using a hierarchical Bayesian conditional logit model. There were 51 respondents from 36 of 58 OPOs in the United States. Of the seven attributes, organ and tissue potential were the most influential, followed by age, type of death, HIV status, donor registration, and Hepatitis C status. To be preferred to an HIV-negative donor, an HIV-positive donor needed to have the potential to donate two additional organs. These data provide insight into the preferences of OPO referral staff and may help explain the lower than expected number of HIV-positive transplants performed since the passage of the HOPE Act.

Incentives and payments in pragmatic clinical trials: Scientific, ethical, and policy considerations.

Pragmatic clinical trials are increasingly used to generate knowledge about real-world clinical interventions. However, they involve some distinctive ethical and regulatory challenges. In this article, we examine a set of issues related to incentives and other payments to patients in pragmatic clinical trials. Although many of the ethical concerns related to incentives and payments in explanatory trials pertain to pragmatic clinical trials, the pragmatic features may introduce additional challenges. These include those related to the risk of incentives and payments undermining the scientific validity and social value of pragmatic clinical trials, the sources of data used in pragmatic clinical trials, and when the pragmatic clinical trials are conducted under waivers of consent. Based on our examination of these matters, we offer some preliminary recommendations regarding incentives and payments in pragmatic clinical trials, recognizing that additional data and experiences are needed to refine them.

An ethics framework for consolidating and prioritizing COVID-19 clinical trials.

Given the dearth of established safe and effective interventions to respond to COVID-19, there is an urgent ethical imperative to conduct meaningful clinical research. The good news is that interventions to be tested are not in short supply. Unfortunately, the human and material resources needed to conduct these trials are finite. It is essential that trials be robust and meet enrollment targets and that lower-quality studies not be permitted to displace higher-quality studies, delaying answers to critical questions. Yet, with few exceptions, existing research review bodies and processes are not designed to ensure these conditions are satisfied. To meet this challenge, we offer guidance for research institutions about how to ethically consolidate and prioritize COVID-19 clinical trials, while recognizing that consolidation and prioritization should also take place upstream (among manufacturers and funders) and at a higher level (e.g. nationally). In our proposed three-stage process, trials must first meet threshold criteria. Those that do are evaluated in a second stage to determine whether the institution has sufficient capacity to support all proposed trials. If it does not, the third stage entails evaluating studies against two additional sets of comparative prioritization criteria: those specific to the study and those that aim to advance diversification of an institution's research portfolio. To implement these criteria fairly, we propose that research institutions form COVID-19 research prioritization committees. We briefly discuss some important attributes of these committees, drawing on the authors' experiences at our respective institutions. Although we focus on clinical trials of COVID-19 therapeutics, our guidance should prove useful for other kinds of COVID-19 research, as well as non-pandemic research, which can raise similar challenges due to the scarcity of research resources.

HIV prevention research and COVID-19: putting ethics guidance to the test.

BACKGROUND: Critical public health measures implemented to mitigate the spread of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic have disrupted health research worldwide, including HIV prevention research. While general guidance has been issued for the responsible conduct of research in these challenging circumstances, the contours of the dueling COVID-19 and HIV/AIDS pandemics raise some critical ethical issues for HIV prevention research. In this paper, we use the recently updated HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) Ethics Guidance Document (EGD) to situate and analyze key ethical challenges related to the conduct of HIV prevention research during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as identify potential areas for refinement of the guidance document based on this unprecedented state of affairs. MAIN BODY: Necessary actions taken for HIV prevention research studies due to the COVID-19 pandemic involve an array of ethical issues including those related to: (1) risk mitigation; (2) behavior change; (3) compounding vulnerability; (4) community engagement; (5) trial reopening; and 6) shifting research priorities. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of the dueling HIV and COVID-19 global pandemics, research teams and sponsors must be nimble in responding to the rapidly changing environment by being sensitive to the associated ethical issues. The HTPN EGD provides a rich set of tools to help identify, analyze and address many of these issues. At the same time, future refinements of the HPTN EGD and other research ethics guidance could be strengthened by providing explicit advice regarding the ethical issues associated with disrupted research and the reopening of studies. In addition, additional consideration should be given to appropriately balancing domains of risk (e.g., physical versus social), addressing the vulnerability of research staff and community partners, and responding to un-anticipatable ancillary care needs of participants and communities. Appropriately addressing these issues will necessitate conceptual work, which would benefit from the careful documentation of the actual ethical issues encountered in research, the strategies implemented to overcome them, and their success in doing so. Throughout all of these efforts, it is critical to remember that the HIV pandemic not be forgotten in the rush to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Ethics of HIV cure research: an unfinished agenda.

BACKGROUND: The pursuit of a cure for HIV is a high priority for researchers, funding agencies, governments and people living with HIV (PLWH). To date, over 250 biomedical studies worldwide are or have been related to discovering a safe, effective, and scalable HIV cure, most of which are early translational research and experimental medicine. As HIV cure research increases, it is critical to identify and address the ethical challenges posed by this research. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of the growing HIV cure research ethics literature, focusing on articles published in English peer-reviewed journals from 2013 to 2021. We extracted and summarized key developments in the ethics of HIV cure research. Twelve community advocates actively engaged in HIV cure research provided input on this summary and suggested areas warranting further ethical inquiry and foresight via email exchange and video conferencing. DISCUSSION: Despite substantial scholarship related to the ethics of HIV cure research, additional attention should focus on emerging issues in six categories of ethical issues: (1) social value (ongoing and emerging biomedical research and scalability considerations); (2) scientific validity (study design issues, such as the use of analytical treatment interruptions and placebos); (3) fair selection of participants (equity and justice considerations); (4) favorable benefit/risk balance (early phase research, benefit-risk balance, risk perception, psychological risks, and pediatric research); (5) informed consent (attention to language, decision-making, informed consent processes and scientific uncertainty); and (6) respect for enrolled participants and community (perspectives of people living with HIV and affected communities and representation). CONCLUSION: HIV cure research ethics has an unfinished agenda. Scientific research and bioethics should work in tandem to advance ethical HIV cure research. Because the science of HIV cure research will continue to rapidly advance, ethical considerations of the major themes we identified will need to be revisited and refined over time.

Guidelines for Reporting Trial Protocols and Completed Trials Modified Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Other Extenuating Circumstances: The CONSERVE 2021 Statement.

Importance: Extenuating circumstances can trigger unplanned changes to randomized trials and introduce methodological, ethical, feasibility, and analytical challenges that can potentially compromise the validity of findings. Numerous randomized trials have required changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but guidance for reporting such modifications is incomplete. Objective: As a joint extension for the CONSORT and SPIRIT reporting guidelines, CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstances) aims to improve reporting of trial protocols and completed trials that undergo important modifications in response to extenuating circumstances. Evidence: A panel of 37 international trial investigators, patient representatives, methodologists and statisticians, ethicists, funders, regulators, and journal editors convened to develop the guideline. The panel developed CONSERVE following an accelerated, iterative process between June 2020 and February 2021 involving (1) a rapid literature review of multiple databases (OVID Medline, OVID EMBASE, and EBSCO CINAHL) and gray literature sources from 2003 to March 2021; (2) consensus-based panelist meetings using a modified Delphi process and surveys; and (3) a global survey of trial stakeholders. Findings: The rapid review yielded 41 673 citations, of which 38 titles were relevant, including emerging guidance from regulatory and funding agencies for managing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on trials. However, no generalizable guidance for all circumstances in which trials and trial protocols might face unanticipated modifications were identified. The CONSERVE panel used these findings to develop a consensus reporting guidelines following 4 rounds of meetings and surveys. Responses were received from 198 professionals from 34 countries, of whom 90% (n = 178) indicated that they understood the concept definitions and 85.4% (n = 169) indicated that they understood and could use the implementation tool. Feedback from survey respondents was used to finalize the guideline and confirm that the guideline's core concepts were applicable and had utility for the trial community. CONSERVE incorporates an implementation tool and checklists tailored to trial reports and trial protocols for which extenuating circumstances have resulted in important modifications to the intended study procedures. The checklists include 4 sections capturing extenuating circumstances, important modifications, responsible parties, and interim data analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: CONSERVE offers an extension to CONSORT and SPIRIT that could improve the transparency, quality, and completeness of reporting important modifications to trials in extenuating circumstances such as COVID-19.

Addressing Ethical Challenges in US-Based HIV Phylogenetic Research.

In recent years, phylogenetic analysis of HIV sequence data has been used in research studies to investigate transmission patterns between individuals and groups, including analysis of data from HIV prevention clinical trials, in molecular epidemiology, and in public health surveillance programs. Phylogenetic analysis can provide valuable information to inform HIV prevention efforts, but it also has risks, including stigma and marginalization of groups, or potential identification of HIV transmission between individuals. In response to these concerns, an interdisciplinary working group was assembled to address ethical challenges in US-based HIV phylogenetic research. The working group developed recommendations regarding (1) study design; (2) data security, access, and sharing; (3) legal issues; (4) community engagement; and (5) communication and dissemination. The working group also identified areas for future research and scholarship to promote ethical conduct of HIV phylogenetic research.