HIV-1 Incidence, Adherence, and Drug Resistance in Individuals Taking Daily Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate for HIV-1 Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis: Pooled Analysis From 72 Global Studies.

BACKGROUND: Oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF) has high efficacy against HIV-1 acquisition. Seventy-two prospective studies of daily oral F/TDF PrEP were conducted to evaluate HIV-1 incidence, drug resistance, adherence, and bone and renal safety in diverse settings. METHODS: HIV-1 incidence was calculated from incident HIV-1 diagnoses after PrEP initiation and within 60 days of discontinuation. Tenofovir concentration in dried blood spots (DBS), drug resistance, and bone/renal safety indicators were evaluated in a subset of studies. RESULTS: Among 17,274 participants, there were 101 cases with new HIV-1 diagnosis (0.77 per 100 person-years; 95% CI 0.63-0.94). In 78 cases with resistance data, 18 (23%) had M184I or V, one (1.3%) had K65R, and three (3.8%) had both mutations. In 54 cases with tenofovir concentration data from DBS, 45 (83.3%), 2 (3.7%), 6 (11.1%), and 1 (1.9%) had average adherence of <2, 2-3, 4-6, and ≥7 doses/week, respectively, and the corresponding incidence was 3.9 (95% CI 2.9-5.3), 0.24 (0.060-0.95), 0.27 (0.12-0.60), and 0.054 (0.008-0.38) per 100 person-years. Adherence was low in younger participants, Hispanic/Latinx and Black participants, cisgender women, and transgender women. Bone and renal adverse event incidence rates were 0.69 and 11.8 per 100 person-years, respectively, consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSIONS: Leveraging the largest pooled analysis of global PrEP studies to date, we demonstrate that F/TDF is safe and highly effective, even with less than daily dosing, in diverse clinical settings, geographies, populations, and routes of HIV-1 exposure.

Psychological and Behavioural Within-participant Predictors of Adherence to Oral HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP).

Oral PrEP's effectiveness relies on adequate adherence during periods of substantial HIV risk. Since most PrEP users will miss doses, understanding predictors within participants can help to explain adherence. We used a cross-sectional, within-participant design with 67 gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men taking PrEP daily. Using a questionnaire, informed by the Information Motivation Behavioral Skills Model, participants were asked about an adherent and a non-adherent episode. PrEP non-adherence was associated with non-normality of the day (p < .001), being out of the home (p < .001), weekend days (p = .01), having company (p = .02), using substances (p = 0.02), not using reminders (p = .03), lower PrEP information (p = .04), lower behavioural skills (p < .001) and less positive affect (p = .002). PrEP adherence assessment could focus on situational variations, supporting the construction of alternative strategies to facilitate adherence in these situations.

HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis and its implementation in the PrEP Impact Trial in England: a pragmatic health technology assessment.

BACKGROUND: HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective in preventing HIV acquisition. To enable routine commissioning of PrEP in England, we aimed to establish population need, duration of need, PrEP uptake, and duration of use in attendees of sexual health services (SHS) in England. METHODS: The Impact Trial was a prospective, open-label, single-arm, multicentre trial conducted at 157 SHS across England between Oct 13, 2017, and July 12, 2020. Clinicians assessed HIV-negative attendees for their risk of HIV acquisition to identify those who were eligible to participate and receive either daily or event-based oral PrEP (tenofovir disoproxil maleate with emtricitabine), as appropriate. Eligible participants were aged 16 years or older, considered HIV-negative on the day of enrolment, and willing to adhere to the trial procedures. Non-trial attendees are mutually exclusive of trial participants and included SHS attendees who were not recruited to the Impact Trial at any point. They include HIV-negative individuals aged 16 years or older who attended a participating SHS at least once after recruitment at that SHS had begun and before Feb 29, 2020. The main outcomes assessed were PrEP need, uptake, and use, and HIV and sexually transmitted infection (STI) incidence. Data are presented up to Feb 29, 2020, before the introduction of COVID-19 control measures. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03253757. FINDINGS: In this analysis, we include 21 356 of 24 268 participants enrolled before Feb 29, 2020. 20 403 participants (95·5%) were men who have sex with men (MSM). Uptake of PrEP among SHS attendees clinically assessed and coded as eligible was 21 292 (57·1%) of 37 289. 18 400 trial participants had at least one post-enrolment visit and a median of 361 days of follow-up (IQR 143-638); 14 039 (75·9%) of these had enough PrEP prescribed to provide protection for 75% of their follow-up time. Among MSM, HIV incidence was 0·13 (95% CI 0·08-0·19) per 100 person-years in trial participants (27 seroconversions) and 0·95 (95% CI 0·88-1·03) per 100 person-years in non-trial attendees (587 seroconversions; proportionate reduction of 86·8%, 95% CI 80·2-91·6). 18 607 bacterial STIs were recorded (incidence 68·1 per 100 person-years in trial participants who were MSM). 4343 (24·4%) MSM participants were diagnosed with two or more STIs, accounting for 14 800 (79·5%) of all 18 607 diagnoses. INTERPRETATION: PrEP need was higher than initially estimated by an expert stakeholder group. The high proportion of follow-up time protected by PrEP suggests that the need for protection persisted throughout trial participation for most participants. HIV incidence among MSM trial participants was low. The large unmet need for PrEP suggests that greater provision is required to maximise the potential of a national programme. The high incidence of bacterial STIs among participants, concentrated within a subgroup of PrEP users, presents an opportunity for tailored STI control measures. FUNDING: NHS England.

"Sex without fear": exploring the psychosocial impact of oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis on gay men in England.

Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) experience a high prevalence of psychosocial health problems, such as harmful substance use and depression, as well as being disproportionately affected by HIV. HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) may provide psychosocial benefits beyond its intended purpose of reducing HIV infection. We explore the psychosocial impact of oral PrEP use on gay men in England using qualitative data from the PROUD study. From February 2014 to January 2016, semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 40 gay men and one trans woman. Participants were purposively recruited based on trial arm allocation, adherence, and sexual risk behaviours. By removing HIV risk from sex, PrEP improves users' wellbeing by reducing HIV-related anxiety and internalised stigma and increasing HIV prevention self-efficacy, sexual pleasure, and intimacy. In turn, these psychological changes may influence behaviour in the form of greater sexual freedom, reduced harmful drug use, and more protective sexual health behaviours. However, PrEP may create internal conflict for some gay men, due to its disruption of social norms around condom use and its perceived influence on their sexual behaviour leading to reduced condom self-efficacy. These findings provide a baseline of PrEP's psychosocial impact amongst some of the first PrEP users in England and supports calls to consider the psychosocial impact of PrEP in prescribing guidelines.

The effect of combination prevention strategies on HIV incidence among gay and bisexual men who have sex with men in the UK: a model-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, the number of new HIV diagnoses among gay and bisexual men who have sex with men (GBMSM) has decreased substantially. We aimed to understand the contribution of different interventions in reducing HIV incidence so far; to estimate future HIV incidence with continuation of current policies and with further scaling up of current interventions; and to estimate the maximum additional annual cost that should be spent towards these interventions for them to offer value for money. METHODS: We calibrated a dynamic, individual-based, stochastic simulation model, the HIV Synthesis Model, to multiple sources of data on HIV among GBMSM aged 15 years or older in the UK. Primarily these were routine HIV surveillance data collected by the UK Health Security Agency. We compared HIV incidence in 2022 with the counterfactual incidence: if HIV testing rates stopped increasing in 2012 and the policy of antiretroviral therapy (ART) at diagnosis was not introduced in mid-2015; if pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) was not introduced; if condom use was low from 2012 in all GBMSM, at levels similar to those observed in 1980; and in the first and second scenario combined. We also projected future outcomes under the assumption of continuation of current policies and considering increases in PrEP and HIV testing uptake and a decrease in condomless sex. FINDINGS: Our model estimated a 77% (90% uncertainty interval [UI] 61-88) decline in HIV incidence since around 2014, with an estimated 597 infections ([90% UI 312-956]; 1·1 per 1000 person-years [90% UI 0·6-1·8]) in men aged 15-64 years in 2022. Both PrEP introduction and increased HIV testing with ART initiation at diagnosis each had a substantial effect on HIV incidence. Without PrEP introduction, we estimate there would have been 2·16 times the number of infections that actually occurred (90% UI 1·06-3·75) between 2012 and 2022; without increased HIV testing and ART initiation at diagnosis there would have been 2·18 times the number of infections that actually occurred (1·18-3·60), and if condomless sex was at the levels before the HIV epidemic, there would have been 2·27 times the number of infections that actually occurred (0·9-5·4). If rates of testing, ART use, and PrEP use remain as they are currently, there is a predicted decline in incidence to 388 HIV infections in 2025 (90% UI 226-650) and to 263 (137-433) in 2030. Increases in HIV testing and PrEP use were predicted to accelerate the decline in HIV incidence. Given the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) benefit and a cost-effectiveness threshold of £30 000 per QALY gained, in order to be cost-effective an additional £1·62 million could be spent per year to increase testing levels by 34% (90% UI 25-46) and PrEP use by 55% (10-107). To achieve that, a 16% reduction in the cost of delivery of testing and PrEP would be required. INTERPRETATION: Combination prevention, including a PrEP strategy, played a major role in the reduction in HIV incidence observed so far in the UK among GBMSM. Continuation of current activities should lead to a continued decline; however, it is unlikely to lead to reaching the target of fewer than 50 HIV infections per year among GBMSM by 2030. It will be important to reduce costs for testing and PrEP for their continued expansion to be cost-effective. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research under its Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme and Medical Research Council-UK Research and Innovation.

Understanding experiences of potential harm among MSM (cis and trans) using HIV self-testing in the SELPHI randomised controlled trial in England and Wales: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: The potential of HIV self-testing (HIVST) to cause harm is a concern hindering widespread implementation. The aim of this paper is to understand the relationship between HIVST and harm in SELPHI (An HIV Self-testing Public Health Intervention), the largest randomised trial of HIVST in a high-income country to date. METHODS: 10 111 cis and trans men who have sex with men (MSM) recruited online (geolocation social/sexual networking apps, social media), aged 16+, reporting previous anal intercourse and resident in England or Wales were first randomised 60/40 to baseline HIVST (baseline testing, BT) or not (no baseline testing, nBT) (randomisation A). BT participants reporting negative baseline test, sexual risk at 3 months and interest in further HIVST were randomised to three-monthly HIVST (repeat testing, RT) or not (no repeat testing, nRT) (randomisation B). All received an exit survey collecting data on harms (to relationships, well-being, false results or being pressured/persuaded to test). Nine participants reporting harm were interviewed in-depth about their experiences in an exploratory substudy; qualitative data were analysed narratively. RESULTS: Baseline: predominantly cis MSM, 90% white, 88% gay, 47% university educated and 7% current/former pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) users. Final survey response rate was: nBT=26% (1056/4062), BT=45% (1674/3741), nRT=41% (471/1147), RT=50% (581/1161).Harms were rare and reported by 4% (n=138/3691) in exit surveys, with an additional two false positive results captured in other study surveys. 1% reported harm to relationships and to well-being in BT, nRT and RT combined. In all arms combined, being pressured or persuaded to test was reported by 1% (n=54/3678) and false positive results in 0.7% (n=34/4665).Qualitative analysis revealed harms arose from the kit itself (technological harms), the intervention (intervention harms) or from the social context of the participant (socially emergent harms). Intervention and socially emergent harms did not reduce HIVST acceptability, whereas technological harms did. DISCUSSION: HIVST harms were rare but strategies to link individuals experiencing harms with psychosocial support should be considered for HIVST scale-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN20312003.

Interpretation of active-control randomised trials: the case for a new analytical perspective involving averted events.

Active-control trials, where an experimental treatment is compared with an established treatment, are performed when the inclusion of a placebo control group is deemed to be unethical. For time-to-event outcomes, the primary estimand is usually the rate ratio, or the closely-related hazard ratio, comparing the experimental group with the control group. In this article we describe major problems in the interpretation of this estimand, using examples from COVID-19 vaccine and HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis trials. In particular, when the control treatment is highly effective, the rate ratio may indicate that the experimental treatment is clearly statistically inferior even when it is worthwhile from a public health perspective. We argue that it is crucially important to consider averted events as well as observed events in the interpretation of active-control trials. An alternative metric that incorporates this information, the averted events ratio, is proposed and exemplified. Its interpretation is simple and conceptually appealing, namely the proportion of events that would be averted by using the experimental treatment rather than the control treatment. The averted events ratio cannot be directly estimated from the active-control trial, and requires an additional assumption about either: (a) the incidence that would have been observed in a hypothetical placebo arm (the counterfactual incidence) or (b) the efficacy of the control treatment (relative to no treatment) that pertained in the active-control trial. Although estimation of these parameters is not straightforward, this must be attempted in order to draw rational inferences. To date, this method has been applied only within HIV prevention research, but has wider applicability to treatment trials and other disease areas.

Licenced doses of approved COVID-19 vaccines may not be optimal: A review of the early-phase, dose-finding trials.

Although over 13 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses have been administered globally, the issue of whether the optimal doses are being used has received little attention. To address this question we reviewed the reports of early-phase dose-finding trials of the nine COVID-19 vaccines approved by World Health Organization, extracting information on study design and findings on reactogenicity and early humoral immune response. The number of different doses evaluated for each vaccine varied widely (range 1-7), as did the number of subjects studied per dose (range 15-190). As expected, the frequency and severity of adverse reactions generally increased at higher doses, although most were clinically tolerable. Higher doses also tended to elicit better immune responses, but differences between the highest dose and the second-highest dose evaluated were small, typically less than 1.6-fold for both binding antibody concentration and neutralising antibody titre. All of the trials had at least one important design limitation - few doses evaluated, large gaps between adjacent doses, or an inadequate sample size - although this is not a criticism of the study investigators, who were working under intense time pressures at the start of the epidemic. It is therefore open to question whether the single dose taken into clinical efficacy trials, and subsequently authorised by regulatory agencies, was optimal. In particular, our analysis indicates that the recommended doses for some vaccines appear to be unnecessarily high. Although reduced dosing for booster injections is an active area of research, the priming dose also merits study. We conclude by suggesting improvements in the design of future vaccine trials, for both next-generation COVID-19 vaccines and for vaccines against other pathogens.

Electronic health records to capture primary outcome measures: two case studies in HIV prevention research.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in the use of electronic health records (EHRs) to improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of clinical trials, including the capture of outcome measures. MAIN TEXT: We describe our experience of using EHRs to capture the primary outcome measure - HIV infection or the diagnosis of HIV infection - in two randomised HIV prevention trials conducted in the UK. PROUD was a clinic-based trial evaluating pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), and SELPHI was an internet-based trial evaluating HIV self-testing kits. The EHR was the national database of HIV diagnoses in the UK, curated by the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). In PROUD, linkage to the UKHSA database was performed at the end of the trial and identified five primary outcomes in addition to the 30 outcomes diagnosed by the participating clinics. Linkage also produced an additional 345 person-years follow-up, an increase of 27% over clinic-based follow-up. In SELPHI, new HIV diagnoses were primarily identified via UKHSA linkage, complemented by participant self-report through internet surveys. Rates of survey completion were low, and only 14 of the 33 new diagnoses recorded in the UKHSA database were also self-reported. Thus UKHSA linkage was essential for capturing HIV diagnoses and the successful conduct of the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience of using the UKHSA database of HIV diagnoses as a source of primary outcomes in two randomised trials in the field of HIV prevention was highly favourable and encourages the use of a similar approach in future trials in this disease area.

COVAC1 phase 2a expanded safety and immunogenicity study of a self-amplifying RNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2.

Background: Lipid nanoparticle (LNP) encapsulated self-amplifying RNA (saRNA) is well tolerated and immunogenic in SARS-CoV-2 seronegative and seropositive individuals aged 18-75. Methods: A phase 2a expanded safety and immunogenicity study of a saRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate LNP-nCoVsaRNA, was conducted at participating centres in the UK between 10th August 2020 and 30th July 2021. Participants received 1 µg then 10 µg of LNP-nCoVsaRNA, ∼14 weeks apart. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were collected for one week post-each vaccine, and unsolicited AEs throughout. Binding and neutralisating anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody raised in participant sera was measured by means of an anti-Spike (S) IgG ELISA, and SARS-CoV-2 pseudoneutralisation assay. (The trial is registered: ISRCTN17072692, EudraCT 2020-001646-20). Findings: 216 healthy individuals (median age 51 years) received 1.0 µg followed by 10.0 µg of the vaccine. 28/216 participants were either known to have previous SARS-CoV2 infection and/or were positive for anti-Spike (S) IgG at baseline. Reactogenicity was as expected based on the reactions following licensed COVID-19 vaccines, and there were no serious AEs related to vaccination. 80% of baseline SARS-CoV-2 naïve individuals (147/183) seroconverted two weeks post second immunization, irrespective of age (18-75); 56% (102/183) had detectable neutralising antibodies. Almost all (28/31) SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals had increased S IgG binding antibodies following their first 1.0 µg dose with a ≥0.5log10 increase in 71% (22/31). Interpretation: Encapsulated saRNA was well tolerated and immunogenic in adults aged 18-75 years. Seroconversion rates in antigen naïve were higher than those reported in our dose-ranging study. Further work is required to determine if this difference is related to a longer dosing interval (14 vs. 4 weeks) or dosing with 1.0 µg followed by 10.0 µg. Boosting of S IgG antibodies was observed with a single 1.0 µg injection in those with pre-existing immune responses. Funding: Grants and gifts from the Medical Research Council UKRI (MC_PC_19076), the National Institute for Health Research/Vaccine Task Force, Partners of Citadel and Citadel Securities, Sir Joseph Hotung Charitable Settlement, Jon Moulton Charity Trust, Pierre Andurand, and Restore the Earth.

Free HIV self-test for identification and linkage to care of previously undetected HIV infection in men who have sex with men in England and Wales (SELPHI): an open-label, internet-based, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: High levels of HIV testing in men who have sex with men remain key to reducing the incidence of HIV. We aimed to assess whether the offer of a single, free HIV self-testing kit led to increased HIV diagnoses with linkage to care. METHODS: SELPHI was an internet-based, open-label, randomised controlled trial that recruited participants via sexual and social networking sites. Eligibility criteria included being a man or trans woman (although trans women are reported separately); being resident in England or Wales, UK; being aged 16 years or older; having had anal intercourse with a man; not having a positive HIV diagnosis; and being willing to provide name, email address, date of birth, and consent to link to national HIV databases. Participants were randomly allocated (3:2) by computer-generated number sequence to receive a free HIV self-test kit (BT group) or to not receive this free kit (nBT group). Online surveys collected data at baseline, 2 weeks after enrolment (BT group only), 3 months after enrolment, and at the end of the study. The primary outcome was confirmed (linked to care) new HIV diagnosis within 3 months of enrolment, analysed by intention to treat. Those assessing the primary outcome were masked to allocation. This study is registered with the ISRCTN Clinical Trials Register, number ISRCTN20312003. FINDINGS: 10 111 participants (6049 in BT group and 4062 in nBT group) enrolled between Feb 16, 2017, and March 1, 2018. The median age of participants was 33 years (IQR 26-44 years); 9000 (89%) participants were White; 8118 (80%) participants were born in the UK; 81 (1%) participants were transgender men; 4706 (47%) participants were university educated; 1537 (15%) participants had never been tested for HIV; and 389 (4%) participants were taking pre-exposure prophylaxis. At enrolment, 7282 (72%) participants reported condomless anal sex with at least one male partner in the previous 3 months. In the BT group, of the 4511 participants for whom HIV testing information was available, 4263 (95%) reported having used the free HIV self-test kit within 3 months.Within 3 months of enrolment there were 19 confirmed new HIV diagnoses (0·31%) in 6049 participants in the BT group and 15 (0·37%) of 4062 in the nBT group (p=0·64). INTERPRETATION: The offer of a single, free HIV self-test did not lead to increased rates of new HIV diagnoses, which could reflect decreasing HIV incidence rates in the UK. Nonetheless, the offer of a free HIV self-testing kit resulted in high HIV testing rates, indicating that self-testing is an attractive testing option for a large group of men who have sex with men. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis for HIV Infection as a Public Health Tool.

The efficacy of pre-exposure prophylaxis, PrEP, with antiviral agents for prevention of HIV infection has been demonstrated in multiple randomized controlled trials and demonstration projects. These trials have studied prevention at the individual level. The effectiveness of PrEP as a public health intervention to reduce HIV incidence at community and population levels is being actively evaluated but is less well described. In reviewing the available data on PrEP as a public health intervention, three significant examples have demonstrated success, and all have been among communities of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (MSM).

Assessing acceptability of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among participants in an HIV vaccine preparedness study in southwestern Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use is highly effective against HIV infection. However, the uptake of PrEP among individuals at high-risk of HIV acquisition in sub-Saharan Africa varies because of availability and acceptability. We assessed the acceptability of PrEP among participants in a prospective HIV vaccine preparedness study in Masaka, southwestern Uganda. METHODS: From November 2018 to August 2019, 20 participants (10 female) were purposively selected for in-depth interviews (IDIs) at 3 and 9 months' post-enrolment in the vaccine preparedness study. Four focus group discussions (FGD) (two among men) were conducted with 29 individuals categorized as: younger (18-24 years) men, younger (18-24 years) women, older (≥30 years) men, and older (≥30 years) women. Apart from IDI specific questions on recent life history including work experience, relationship history and places lived, topics for IDIs and FGDs included knowledge of HIV, perceptions of HIV risk (including own risk), knowledge of and use of PrEP. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability was used to structure a thematic framework approach for data analysis. RESULTS: Participants understood that PrEP was an oral pill taken daily by HIV negative individuals to prevent acquisition of HIV. Overall, interest in and acceptability of PrEP was high, more than half expressed positivity towards PrEP but were not ready to initiate taking it citing the burden of daily oral pill taking, related side effects, stigma and distrust of PrEP. Fourteen participants (from IDI and FGD) initiated PrEP, although some (one FGD and two IDI participants) stopped taking it due to side effects or perceived reduced risk. CONCLUSION: We observed a keen interest in PrEP initiation among our study participants. However, a limited understanding of PrEP and associated concerns impeded uptake and sustained use. Hence, interventions are needed to address end-user challenges to increase uptake and support adherence.

Perceptions and Practicalities Influencing Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Adherence Among Men Who Have Sex with Men in England.

PrEP is highly effective for HIV prevention but requires adequate adherence. In this paper we use the perceptions and practicalities approach (PAPA) to identify factors that influenced PrEP adherence using qualitative data from the PROUD study. From February 2014 to January 2016, we interviewed 41 gay, bisexual and other men-who-have-sex-with-men and one trans woman who were enrolled in the study. We purposively recruited participants for interview based on trial arm allocation, adherence and sexual risk behaviours. The interviews were conducted in English, audio-recorded, transcribed, coded and analysed using framework analysis. Participants in general were highly motivated to use and adhere to PrEP, and this was linked to strong perceptions of personal necessity for PrEP as they felt at risk of HIV and viewed PrEP as highly effective. On the other hand, concerns about side effects and HIV resistance did inhibit PrEP initiation and adherence although this was uncommon. Practical factors such as daily routine, existing habitual pill-taking and pill storage impacted adherence. Drug and alcohol use rarely caused participants to miss doses. These findings indicate that using the principals of PAPA to unpick influencers of PrEP use, could help tailor adherence support in PrEP programmes.

Complex PrEP: the factors requiring consultant-led review of PrEP users.

INTRODUCTION: HIV-1 pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been available in England since March 2020 on the National Health Service using generic emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil. 56 Dean Street (56DS) provided PrEP through (1) additional private care from September 2015, estimated to be providing 11% of England's PrEP in 2019; and (2) the IMPACT trial, as well as monitoring those self-sourcing PrEP. Providing PrEP at scale through a nurse-led service required a safety net for complex individuals. 56DS introduced a consultant-led PrEP outpatient service, the PrEP review clinic, in January 2018 and we report the outcomes of this service. METHODS: We present a retrospective case note review of the PrEP review clinic with descriptive outcomes from 26 January 2018 to 20 December 2019. Reason for referral, demographics, PrEP management and PrEP discontinuations were recorded. RESULTS: 13 980 unique users accessed PrEP from 56DS during the two year evaluation period. 220 individuals were seen in the PrEP review clinic. Majority of patients were referred for renal issues (114 of 220, 51.8%), followed by side effects (59 of 220, 26.8%) and comorbidities (38 of 220, 17.2%). Of those with renal issues, 89 (out of 114, 78.1%) users were referred for an abnormal estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). 35 (out of 114, 30.7%) PrEP users had an eGFR between 45 and 59 mL/min/1.73 m2, of whom 2 (5.7%) discontinued PrEP. Majority of users were advised to stop supplements±switch to event-based dosing (24 of 35, 68.6%). Ten PrEP users were referred with an eGFR between 30 and 44 mL/min/1.73 m2; 4 (40%) stopped or did not start PrEP and 6 (60%) were asked to stop supplements±switch to event-based dosing. DISCUSSION: A small proportion of PrEP users have complex PrEP issues. Methods to manage renal dysfunction with PrEP included stopping supplements and switching to event-based dosing. Those with side effects were managed with an array of options, with only modest effectiveness. Other PrEP options are needed to support those with toxicities or intolerances.

Safety and immunogenicity of a self-amplifying RNA vaccine against COVID-19: COVAC1, a phase I, dose-ranging trial.

BACKGROUND: Lipid nanoparticle (LNP) encapsulated self-amplifying RNA (saRNA) is a novel technology formulated as a low dose vaccine against COVID-19. METHODS: A phase I first-in-human dose-ranging trial of a saRNA COVID-19 vaccine candidate LNP-nCoVsaRNA, was conducted at Imperial Clinical Research Facility, and participating centres in London, UK, between 19th June to 28th October 2020. Participants received two intramuscular (IM) injections of LNP-nCoVsaRNA at six different dose levels, 0.1-10.0µg, given four weeks apart. An open-label dose escalation was followed by a dose evaluation. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were collected for one week from enrolment, with follow-up at regular intervals (1-8 weeks). The binding and neutralisation capacity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody raised in participant sera was measured by means of an anti-Spike (S) IgG ELISA, immunoblot, SARS-CoV-2 pseudoneutralisation and wild type neutralisation assays. (The trial is registered: ISRCTN17072692, EudraCT 2020-001646-20). FINDINGS: 192 healthy individuals with no history or serological evidence of COVID-19, aged 18-45 years were enrolled. The vaccine was well tolerated with no serious adverse events related to vaccination. Seroconversion at week six whether measured by ELISA or immunoblot was related to dose (both p<0.001), ranging from 8% (3/39; 0.1µg) to 61% (14/23; 10.0µg) in ELISA and 46% (18/39; 0.3µg) to 87% (20/23; 5.0µg and 10.0µg) in a post-hoc immunoblot assay. Geometric mean (GM) anti-S IgG concentrations ranged from 74 (95% CI, 45-119) at 0.1µg to 1023 (468-2236) ng/mL at 5.0µg (p<0.001) and was not higher at 10.0µg. Neutralisation of SARS-CoV-2 by participant sera was measurable in 15% (6/39; 0.1µg) to 48% (11/23; 5.0µg) depending on dose level received. INTERPRETATION: Encapsulated saRNA is safe for clinical development, is immunogenic at low dose levels but failed to induce 100% seroconversion. Modifications to optimise humoral responses are required to realise its potential as an effective vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. FUNDING: This study was co-funded by grants and gifts from the Medical Research Council UKRI (MC_PC_19076), and the National Institute Health Research/Vaccine Task Force, Partners of Citadel and Citadel Securities, Sir Joseph Hotung Charitable Settlement, Jon Moulton Charity Trust, Pierre Andurand, Restore the Earth.

Systematic comparison of HIV-1 Envelope-specific IgG responses induced by different vaccination regimens: Can we steer IgG recognition towards regions of viral vulnerability?

Immunogens and vaccination regimens can influence patterns of immune-epitope recognition, steering them towards or away from epitopes of potential viral vulnerability. HIV-1 envelope (Env)-specific antibodies targeting variable region 2 (V2) or 3 (V3) correlated with protection during the RV144 trial, however, it was suggested that the immunodominant V3 region might divert antibody responses away from other relevant sites. We mapped IgG responses against linear Env epitopes in five clinical HIV vaccine trials, revealing a specific pattern of Env targeting for each regimen. Notable V2 responses were only induced in trials administering CRF01_AE based immunogens, but targeting of V3 was seen in all trials, with the soluble, trimeric CN54gp140 protein eliciting robust V3 recognition. Strong V3 targeting was linked to greater overall response, increased number of total recognised antigenic regions, and where present, stronger V2 recognition. Hence, strong induction of V3-specific antibodies did not negatively impact the targeting of other linear epitopes in this study, suggesting that the induction of antibodies against V3 and other regions of potential viral vulnerability need not be necessarily mutually exclusive.

HIV Prevention in a Time of COVID-19: A Report from the HIVR4P // Virtual Conference 2021.

The HIV Research for Prevention (HIVR4P) conference catalyzes knowledge sharing on biomedical HIV prevention interventions such as HIV vaccines, antibody infusions, pre-exposure prophylaxis, and microbicides in totality-from the molecular details and delivery formulations to the behavioral, social, and structural underpinnings. HIVR4P // Virtual was held over the course of 2 weeks on January 27-28 and February 3-4, 2021 as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continued to inflict unprecedented harm globally. The HIVR4P community came together with 1,802 researchers, care providers, policymakers, implementers, and advocates from 92 countries whose expertise spanned the breadth of the HIV prevention pipeline from preclinical to implementation. The program included 113 oral and 266 poster presentations. This article presents a brief summary of the conference highlights. Complete abstracts, webcasts, and daily rapporteur summaries may be found on the conference website (https://www.hivr4p.org/).

Rising rates of recent preexposure prophylaxis exposure among men having sex with men newly diagnosed with HIV: antiviral resistance patterns and treatment outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is contributing to achieve a reduction in HIV diagnoses in men having sex with men (MSM). Albeit infrequent, HIV infections in the context of recent PrEP exposure represent a clinical challenge. METHODS: Data on recent PrEP use and possible reasons leading to HIV infection were analysed in individuals newly diagnosed with HIV at 56 Dean Street clinic in 2016-2020. Demographics, immune-virological parameters, genotypic resistance test results and treatment management in this group were compared with those not reporting recent PrEP exposure using Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Fifty-two of 1030 (5%) individuals reported recent PrEP exposure at HIV diagnosis; 98% were MSM, median age 34 years (interquartile range [IQR] 28-42), 65% of white ethnicity, 65% non-UK-born. 35% reported PrEP intake the day before testing HIV positive, 46% reported sub-optimal PrEP adherence since their last negative HIV test result. Thirty-three of 52 (63%) were self-sourcing PrEP and 9/52 (17%) reported issues with its supply. Recent PrEP use was associated to lower HIV viral load and higher CD4+ cell count at baseline than in counterparts non-recently exposed to PrEP (P < 0.01). M184V mutation was harboured more commonly in the recent PrEP use group (30% vs. 1%, P < 0.01). The proportion of individuals recently exposed to PrEP among those diagnosed with HIV rose sharply, reaching 21% in the first semester of 2020. Viral suppression was achieved by all patients intensified from PrEP to antiretroviral treatment (ART) who remained in care at week 24. DISCUSSION: Rapid PrEP intensification to ART allowed to achieve high rates of HIV viral suppression despite significant rates of M184V mutation harboured in those newly diagnosed with HIV and reporting recent PrEP exposure.