Exploring a community's understanding of HIV vaccine-induced seropositivity in a South African research setting

Background. The high HIV prevalence and incidence in South Africa makes it suitable for recruitment of participants for large-scale HIV preventive vaccine trials. However, fear of vaccine-induced seropositivity (VISP) may be a barrier for community acceptability of the trial, for volunteers to participate in HIV preventive vaccine trials and for uptake of an efficacious vaccine. Prior to 2015, when the first phase 1 safety HIV vaccine trial was undertaken at Setshaba Research Centre, Soshanguve, the local community stakeholders and healthcare workers were naive about HIV vaccine research and HIV preventive vaccines. Objective. To explore knowledge and perceptions regarding VISP among community stakeholders and healthcare workers in peri-urban Soshanguve, Tshwane.Methods. Using a quantitative-qualitative mixed-methods study design, surveys (n=50) and in-depth interviews (n=18) were conducted during July - August 2015. Participants included community stakeholders, community advisory board members and healthcare workers, who were >18 years old and had attended community educational workshops during September 2014 - May 2015. Audio recordings of interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded using content thematic analysis. Data were further analysed by sex, age and educational level.Results. Of a maximum score of 2 on knowledge on VISP, the 50 survey participants (mean age 33.78 years; 45 females) obtained an average of 0.88 (44%). Of 17 in-depth interviewees (one interview could not be transcribed; mean age 30.9 years; 12 females), 8 (47%) displayed some knowledge about VISP, of whom only 5 defined VISP correctly. Women were more knowledgeable about VISP than men; 5 of 12 women (42%) came close to defining VISP correctly, while none of the 5 men did so. The main fear of trial participation expressed by most participants (n=6) was testing HIV-positive as a result of the vaccine. While some participants believed that the community's perceptions of VISP would negatively affect HIV vaccine trial support and recruitment efforts, others noted that if trial participants understand the concept of VISP and are part of support groups, then they would have the information to combat negative attitudes within their community. Conclusion. Most participants had an inaccurate and incomplete understanding of VISP. Many feared testing HIV-positive at clinics; therefore, education on improving a basic understanding of how vaccines work and why VISP occurs is essential. In addition, assessing participant understanding of HIV testing, transmission and VISP is critical for recruitment of participants into HIV vaccine trials and may improve acceptability of an HIV preventive vaccine

Exploring a community's understanding of HIV vaccine­induced seropositivity in a South African research setting.

BACKGROUND: The high HIV prevalence and incidence in South Africa makes it suitable for recruitment of participants for large-scale HIV preventive vaccine trials. However, fear of vaccine-induced seropositivity (VISP) may be a barrier for community acceptability of the trial, for volunteers to participate in HIV preventive vaccine trials and for uptake of an efficacious vaccine. Prior to 2015, when the first phase 1 safety HIV vaccine trial was undertaken at Setshaba Research Centre, Soshanguve, the local community stakeholders and healthcare workers were naive about HIV vaccine research and HIV preventive vaccines. OBJECTIVE: To explore knowledge and perceptions regarding VISP among community stakeholders and healthcare workers in peri-urbanb Soshanguve, Tshwane. METHODS: Using a quantitative-qualitative mixed-methods study design, surveys (n=50) and in-depth interviews (n=18) were conducted during July - August 2015. Participants included community stakeholders, community advisory board members and healthcare workers, who were >18 years old and had attended community educational workshops during September 2014 - May 2015. Audio recordings of interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded using content thematic analysis. Data were further analysed by sex, age and educational level. RESULTS: Of a maximum score of 2 on knowledge on VISP, the 50 survey participants (mean age 33.78 years; 45 females) obtained an average of 0.88 (44%). Of 17 in-depth interviewees (one interview could not be transcribed; mean age 30.9 years; 12 females), 8 (47%) displayed some knowledge about VISP, of whom only 5 defined VISP correctly. Women were more knowledgeable about VISP than men; 5 of 12 women (42%) came close to defining VISP correctly, while none of the 5 men did so. The main fear of trial participation expressed by most participants (n=6) was testing HIV-positive as a result of the vaccine. While some participants believed that the community's perceptions of VISP would negatively affect HIV vaccine trial support and recruitment efforts, others noted that if trial participants understand the concept of VISP and are part of support groups, then they would have the information to combat negative attitudes within their community. CONCLUSION: Most participants had an inaccurate and incomplete understanding of VISP. Many feared testing HIV-positive at clinics; therefore, education on improving a basic understanding of how vaccines work and why VISP occurs is essential. In addition, assessing participant understanding of HIV testing, transmission and VISP is critical for recruitment of participants into HIV vaccine trials and may improve acceptability of an HIV preventive vaccine.

A partially randomised trial of pretomanid, moxifloxacin and pyrazinamide for pulmonary TB.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for TB is lengthy and toxic, and new regimens are needed.METHODS: Participants with pulmonary drug-susceptible TB (DS-TB) were randomised to receive: 200 mg pretomanid (Pa, PMD) daily, 400 mg moxifloxacin (M) and 1500 mg pyrazinamide (Z) for 6 months (6Pa200MZ) or 4 months (4Pa200MZ); 100 mg pretomanid daily for 4 months in the same combination (4Pa100MZ); or standard DS-TB treatment for 6 months. The primary outcome was treatment failure or relapse at 12 months post-randomisation. The non-inferiority margin for between-group differences was 12.0%. Recruitment was paused following three deaths and not resumed.RESULTS: Respectively 4/47 (8.5%), 11/57 (19.3%), 14/52 (26.9%) and 1/53 (1.9%) DS-TB outcomes were unfavourable in patients on 6Pa200MZ, 4Pa200MZ, 4Pa100MZ and controls. There was a 6.6% (95% CI -2.2% to 15.4%) difference per protocol and 9.9% (95%CI -4.1% to 23.9%) modified intention-to-treat difference in unfavourable responses between the control and 6Pa200MZ arms. Grade 3+ adverse events affected 68/203 (33.5%) receiving experimental regimens, and 19/68 (27.9%) on control. Ten of 203 (4.9%) participants on experimental arms and 2/68 (2.9%) controls died.CONCLUSION: PaMZ regimens did not achieve non-inferiority in this under-powered trial. An ongoing evaluation of PMD remains a priority.

Interaction between C-Tb and PPD given concomitantly in a split-body randomised controlled trial.

SETTING: Seven tuberculosis (TB) clinics in South Africa. OBJECTIVE: As both purified protein derivative (PPD) and a Mycobacterium tuberculosis-specific skin test (C-Tb) contain region of difference 1 (RD1) antigens, we conducted a study to evaluate whether there was any interaction between the two during concomitant and separate administration in patients with newly diagnosed culture-positive TB. DESIGN: Adult patients with active TB (n = 456, 20% human immunodeficiency virus infected) were randomised to receive only C-Tb, only PPD, or concomitant injection of both C-Tb and PPD using the Mantoux technique. Indurations were read after 48-72 h. QuantiFERON®-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT) was performed in tandem. RESULTS: Of the 456 study participants, 154 simultaneously received both C-Tb and PPD, 153 only C-Tb and 149 only PPD. There was no effect of concomitant injection of PPD on the mean C-Tb induration (19 mm, 95%CI 17-22 vs. 18 mm, 95%CI 16-21; P = 0.91). In patients with active TB, C-Tb sensitivity (78%) was similar to PPD (81%) and QFT (84%; excluding 82/429 [19%] indeterminate results). All tests showed reduced sensitivity in participants with CD4 <100 cells/µl. CONCLUSION: In patients with active TB, there was no interaction between C-Tb and PPD during concomitant injection of both agents. Sensitivities were similar for PPD and C-Tb.