Bone turnover change after randomized switch from tenofovir disoproxil to tenofovir alafenamide fumarate in men with HIV.

OBJECTIVE: Bone loss in people with HIV (PWH) is poorly understood. Switching tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) to tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) has yielded bone mineral density (BMD) increases. PETRAM (NCT#:03405012) investigated whether BMD and bone turnover changes correlate. DESIGN: Open-label, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Single-site, outpatient, secondary care. PARTICIPANTS: Nonosteoporotic, virologically suppressed, cis-male PWH taking TDF/emtricitabine (FTC)/rilpivirine (RPV) for more than 24 weeks. INTERVENTION: Continuing TDF/FTC/RPV versus switching to TAF/FTC/RPV (1 : 1 randomization). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: :[ 18 F]NaF-PET/CT for bone turnover (standardized uptake values, SUV mean ) and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry for lumbar spine and total hip BMD. RESULTS: Thirty-two men, median age 51 years, 76% white, median duration TDF/FTC/RPV 49 months, were randomized between 31 August 2018 and 09 March 2020. Sixteen TAF:11 TDF were analyzed. Baseline-final scan range was 23-103 (median 55) weeks. LS-SUV mean decreased for both groups (TAF -7.9% [95% confidence interval -14.4, -1.5], TDF -5.3% [-12.1,1.5], P  = 0.57). TH-SUV mean showed minimal changes (TAF +0.3% [-12.2,12.8], TDF +2.9% [-11.1,16.9], P  = 0.77). LS-BMD changes were slightly more favorable with TAF but failed to reach significance (TAF +1.7% [0.3,3.1], TDF -0.3 [-1.8,1.2], P  = 0.06). Bone turnover markers decreased more with TAF ([CTX -35.3% [-45.7, -24.9], P1NP -17.6% [-26.2, -8.5]) than TDF (-11.6% [-28.8, +5.6] and -6.9% [-19.2, +5.4] respectively); statistical significance was only observed for CTX ( P  = 0.02, P1NP, P  = 0.17). CONCLUSION: Contrary to our hypothesis, lumbar spine and total hip regional bone formation (SUV mean ) and BMD did not differ postswitch to TAF. However, improved LS-BMD and CTX echo other TAF-switch studies. The lack of difference in SUV mean may be due to inadequate power.

Improving effective contraception uptake through provision of bridging contraception within community pharmacies: findings from the Bridge-it Study process evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To present process evaluation results from the Bridge-it Study, a pragmatic cluster randomised cross-over trial to improve effective contraception uptake through provision of the progestogen only pill (POP) plus sexual and reproductive health (SRH) clinic rapid-access to women presenting to community pharmacies for emergency contraception (EC). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A multimethod process evaluation was conducted to assess intervention implementation, mechanisms of change and contextual factors. Data were gathered from screening logs (n=599), observations of pharmacist training, analysis of data from 4-month follow-up questionnaires (n=406), monitoring of contemporaneous events and qualitative interviews with 22 pharmacists, 5 SRH clinical staff and 36 study participants in three participating UK sites in Lothian, Tayside and London. RESULTS: The intervention was largely delivered as intended and was acceptable. Pharmacists', SRH clinical staff and participants' accounts highlighted that providing a supply of POP with EC from the pharmacy as routine practice may have positive impacts on contraceptive practices in the short term, and potentially longer term. Key mechanisms of change included ease of access, increased awareness of contraception and services, and greater motivation and perceptions of self-efficacy. Few participants took up the offer to attend an SRH service (rapid-access component), and existing barriers within the SRH context were apparent (eg, lack of staff). Participant accounts highlight persistent barriers to accessing and using routine effective contraception remain. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation appeared to be acceptable and feasible, highlighting the potential for provision of POP within EC consultations as routine practice in community pharmacies. However, lack of engagement with the rapid access component of the intervention and existing barriers within the SRH context suggest that signposting to SRH services may be sufficient. Wider implementation should consider ways to address key implementation challenges to increase effectiveness and sustainability, and to overcome persistent barriers to accessing and using effective contraception. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN70616901.

Pragmatic cluster randomised cohort cross-over trial to determine the effectiveness of bridging from emergency to regular contraception: the Bridge-It study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Oral emergency contraception (EC) can prevent unintended pregnancy but it is important to start a regular method of contraception. Women in the UK usually access EC from a pharmacy but then need a subsequent appointment with a general practitioner or a sexual and reproductive health (SRH) service to access regular contraception. Unintended pregnancies can occur during this time. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Bridge-It is a pragmatic cluster randomised cohort cross-over trial designed to determine whether pharmacist provision of a bridging supply of a progestogen-only pill (POP) plus rapid access to a local SRH clinic, results in increased uptake of effective contraception and prevents more unintended pregnancies than provision of EC alone. Bridge-It involves 31 pharmacies in three UK regions (London, Lothian and Tayside) aiming to recruit 626-737 women. Pharmacies will give EC (levonorgestrel) according to normal practice and recruit women to both intervention and the control phases of the study. In the intervention phase, pharmacists will provide the POP (desogestrel) and offer rapid access to an SRH clinic. In the control phase, pharmacists will advise women to attend a contraceptive provider for contraception (standard care).Women will be asked 4 months later about contraceptive use. Data linkage to abortion registries will provide abortion rates over 12 months. The sample size is calculated on the primary outcome of effective contraception use at 4 months (yes/no) with 90% power and a 5% level of significance. Abortion rates will be an exploratory secondary analysis. Process evaluation includes interviews with pharmacists, SRH clinicians and women. Cost-effectiveness analysis will use a healthcare system perspective and be expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was received from South East Scotland REC June 2017. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN70616901.