Dataset Information

HIV prevention clinical trials' community engagement guidelines: inequality, and ethical conflicts.

ABSTRACT: In 2004 and 2005, the first clinical trials were launched to investigate the use of tenofovir for HIV prevention in Cambodia,Cameroon, Nigeria and Thailand. Controversies erupted over the ethical integrity of the research protocol. We reflect on the events that ledto the controversies and identified that scientific and ethical concerns raised by members of local communities at each of these sites wereerased by trialists, causing crisis that led to premature shut down the early PrEP trials. In the aftermath of these trials, the World HealthOrganisation, UNAIDS, and AVAC developed ethics guidelines intended to recognize the concerns as authentic, and developed guidelines toimprove researchers' engagement of communities in biomedical HIV prevention trial design and implementation. Our findings suggest thatthe ethics guidelines are limited in its ability to address power inequalities that leads to voice erasures and non-recognition of localcompetencies. Rather the ethical documents enabled trialists to gain a new sense of authority through the interpretations of ethical researchconduct enabling trialists regain power that can further entrench inequality and voice erasures. To address concerns with what seems anintractable problem, we suggested models of engagement for off-shored research may be the option.

SUBMITTER: Folayan MO

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7448920 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

HIV prevention clinical trials' community engagement guidelines: inequality, and ethical conflicts.

Folayan Morenike O MO Peterson Kristin K

Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica 20200605 1

In 2004 and 2005, the first clinical trials were launched to investigate the use of tenofovir for HIV prevention in Cambodia,Cameroon, Nigeria and Thailand. Controversies erupted over the ethical integrity of the research protocol. We reflect on the events that ledto the controversies and identified that scientific and ethical concerns raised by members of local communities at each of these sites wereerased by trialists, causing crisis that led to premature shut down the early PrEP trials. In th ...[more]

PMID: 32921972

Similar Datasets

Project description:Obtaining the definitive data necessary to determine the safety and efficacy of using antiretroviral treatment (ART) to reduce the sexual transmission of HIV in heterosexual couples encountered an array of ethical challenges that threatened to compromise HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 052, the multinational clinical trial addressing this issue that has profound public health implications.To describe and analyze the major ethical challenges faced in HPTN 052.The ethical issues and modifications of HPTN 052 in response to these issues were cataloged by the principal investigator, the lead coordinator, and the ethicist working on the trial. The major ethical issues that were unique to the trial were then described and analyzed in light of the published literature as well as guidances and policies. The ethical challenges that must be addressed in many clinical trials, such as those related to obtaining informed consent and making provisions for ancillary care, are not described.When HPTN 052 was being designed, ethical questions emerged related to the relevance of the research question itself given data from observational research and a range of beliefs about the appropriate means of preventing and treating HIV infection and AIDS. Furthermore, ethical challenges were faced regarding site selection since there was a scientific need to conduct the research in settings where HIV incidence was high, but alternatives to study participation should be available. As in most HIV-prevention research, ethical questions surrounded the determination of the appropriate prevention package for all of those enrolled. During the course of the trial, guidance documents and policies emerged that were of direct relevance to the research questions, calling for a balancing of concerns for the research subjects and trial integrity. When the study results were made public, there was a need to ensure access to the treatment shown to be effective that in some cases differed from the guidelines used at the sites where the research was being conducted. In addition, questions were raised about whether there was an obligation to notify subjects about 'unlinked' transmissions of HIV, that is, infections acquired from someone other than the designated sexual partner enrolled in the study.The ethical issues described are limited to those discerned by the authors and not those of other stakeholders who may have identified additional issues or had a different perspective in analyzing them.Understanding the ethical challenges faced in HPTN 052 promises to inform the design and conduct of future complex, long-term clinical trials aimed at addressing critical scientific and public health questions, where data and practice patterns emerge over the course of the trial.

Project description:Good Participatory Practice (GPP) guidelines support and direct community engagement practices in biomedical HIV prevention trials, however no standardized metrics define the implementation and evaluation of these practices. Collaboratively, the Community Program staff of the HIV Vaccine Trials Network (HVTN) and the HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) created a metric to describe, monitor, and evaluate one component of GPP, recruitment practices, in two HIV monoclonal Antibody Mediated Prevention (AMP) clinical trials, HVTN 703/HPTN 081 and HVTN 704/HPTN 085. Through consultation with community representatives from each clinical research site (hereafter "site(s)"), who made up the study Community Working Groups, recruitment strategy descriptors were developed for both trials to characterize responses to "How did you hear about the AMP study?" The Community Working Groups also helped to define and establish time points that were selected to allow comparisons across sites. Data were collected by 43 of 46 clinical research sites from January 1, 2017 to February 28, 2018. All 43 sites used multiple recruitment strategies successfully, but strategies varied by region. Globally, referrals was the most efficient and effective recruitment strategy as evidenced by the screening: enrollment ratio of 2.2:1 in Africa, and 2.1:1 in the Americas/Switzerland. Print materials were also valuable globally (3:1 Africa, 4.2:1 Americas/Switzerland). In Africa, in-person outreach was also quite effective (2.3:1) and led to the most enrollments (748 of 1186, 63%). In the Americas/Switzerland, outreach was also effective (2.6:1), but internet use resulted in the most screens (1893 of 4275, 44%) and enrollments (677 of 1531, 44%), compared to 12 of 2887 (0.4%) and 2 of 1204 (0.1%) in Africa, respectively. Standardized metrics and data collection aid meaningful comparisons of optimal community engagement methods for trial enrollment. Internet strategies had better success in the Americas/Switzerland than in sub-Saharan African countries. Data are essential in outreach staff efforts to improve screening-to-enrollment ratios. Because the effectiveness of recruitment strategies varies by region, it is critical that clinical research sites tailor community engagement and recruitment strategies to their local environment, and that they are supported with resources enabling use of a range of approaches.

Project description:BackgroundSouth Africa is a major hub of HIV prevention trials, with plans for a licensure trial to start in 2015. The appropriate standards of care and of prevention in HIV vaccine trials are complex and debated issues and ethical guidelines offer some direction. However, there has been limited empirical exploration of South African stakeholders' perspectives on ethical guidance related to prevention and care in HIV vaccine trials.MethodsSite staff, Community Advisory Board members and Research Ethics Committee members involved with current HIV vaccine trials in South Africa were invited to participate in an exploration of their views. A questionnaire listed 10 care and 10 prevention recommendations drawn from two widely available sets of ethical guidelines for biomedical HIV prevention trials. Respondents (n = 98) rated each recommendation on five dimensions: "Familiarity with", "Ease of Understanding", "Ease of Implementing", "Perceived Protection", and "Agreement with" each ethical recommendation. The ratings were used to describe stakeholder perspectives on dimensions for each recommendation. Dimension ratings were averaged across the five dimensions and used as an indication of overall merit for each recommendation. Differences were explored across dimensions, between care-oriented and prevention-oriented recommendations, and between stakeholder groups.ResultsBoth care and prevention recommendations were rated highly overall, with median ratings well above the scale midpoint. In general, informed consent recommendations were most positively rated. Care-related recommendations were rated significantly more positively than prevention-related recommendations, with the five lowest-rated recommendations being prevention-related. The most problematic dimension across all recommendations was "Ease of Implementing," and the least problematic was "Agreement with," suggesting the most pressing stakeholder concerns are practical rather than theoretical; that is, respondents agree with but see barriers to the attainment of these recommendations.ConclusionsWe propose that prevention recommendations be prioritized for refinement, especially those assigned bottom-ranking scores for "Ease of Implementing", and/ or "Ease of Understanding" in order to assist vaccine stakeholders to better comprehend and implement these recommendations. Further qualitative research could also assist to better understand nuances in stakeholder reservations about implementing such recommendations.

Project description:ObjectivesBroad international guidelines and studies in the context of individual clinical trials highlight the centrality of community stakeholder engagement in conducting ethically rigorous HIV prevention trials. We explored and identified challenges and facilitators for community stakeholder engagement in biomedical HIV prevention trials in diverse global settings. Our aim was to assess and deepen the empirical foundation for priorities included in the GPP guidelines and to highlight challenges in implementation that may merit further attention in subsequent GPP iterations.MethodsFrom 2008-2012 we conducted an embedded, multiple case study centered in Thailand, India, South Africa and Canada. We conducted in-depth interviews and focus groups with respondents from different trial-related subsystems: civil society organization representatives, community advocates, service providers, clinical trialists/researchers, former trial participants, and key HIV risk populations. Interviews/focus groups were recorded, and coded using thematic content analysis. After intra-case analyses, we conducted cross-case analysis to contrast and synthesize themes and sub-themes across cases. Lastly, we applied the case study findings to explore and assess UNAIDS/AVAC GPP guidelines and the GPP Blueprint for Stakeholder Engagement.ResultsAcross settings, we identified three cross-cutting themes as essential to community stakeholder engagement: trial literacy, including lexicon challenges and misconceptions that imperil sound communication; mistrust due to historical exploitation; and participatory processes: engaging early; considering the breadth of "community"; and, developing appropriate stakeholder roles. Site-specific challenges arose in resource-limited settings and settings where trials were halted.ConclusionsThis multiple case study revealed common themes underlying community stakeholder engagement across four country settings that largely mirror GPP goals and the GPP Blueprint, as well as highlighting challenges in the implementation of important guidelines. GPP guidance documents could be strengthened through greater focus on: identifying and addressing the community-specific roots of mistrust and its impact on trial literacy activities; achieving and evaluating representativeness in community stakeholder groups; and addressing the impact of power and funding streams on meaningful engagement and independent decision-making.

Dataset Information

HIV prevention clinical trials' community engagement guidelines: inequality, and ethical conflicts.

Publications

HIV prevention clinical trials' community engagement guidelines: inequality, and ethical conflicts.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets