Risk to Nonparticipants in HIV Remission Studies With Treatment Interruption: A Symposium

A partner protection package for HIV cure-related trials involving analytical treatment interruptions

Analytical treatment interruptions (ATIs) have become a key methodological approach to evaluate the effects of experimental HIV cure-related research interventions. During ATIs, sex partners of trial participants might be at risk of acquiring HIV. This risk raises both ethical and feasibility concerns about ATI trials. We propose a partner protection package (P3) approach to address these concerns. A P3 approach would provide guidance to investigators, sponsors, and those who are designing and implementing context-specific partner protections in HIV cure-related trials involving ATIs. The approach would also help assure institutional review boards, trial participants, and communities that ATI trials with a P3 would provide appropriate partner protections. We offer a prototype P3 framework that delineates three basic considerations for protecting participants' sex partners during ATI trials: (1) ensuring the scientific and social value of the ATI and the trial, (2) reducing the likelihood of unintended HIV transmission, and (3) ensuring prompt management of any acquired HIV infection. We outline possible ways of implementing these basic considerations.

HIV remission trial investigators' attitudes towards risk and risk mitigation in trials that include treatment interruption

Early-phase HIV remission ("cure") trials aim to test interventions developed to eradicate HIV or to sustainably control HIV without antiretroviral treatment (ART). Many remission trials include analytic treatment interruption (ATI) to evaluate interventions, which increases the risk to participants and their sexual partners. We conducted an online questionnaire of international HIV remission trial investigators and other study team members to assess their expectations regarding the time to achieve long-term control of HIV replication without treatment (functional cure) or complete eradication of replication-competent HIV virus (sterilizing cure); attitudes toward HIV remission research and the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of six HIV transmission risk mitigation strategies during trials with ATI of fixed duration. Nearly half of respondents (47%) reported expecting a functional cure for HIV to be achieved in 5-10 years, and one-third (35%) reported 10-20 years for a sterilizing cure to be achieved. On a scale of -3 to 3, mean scores indicated greater respondent concern about the risk of HIV transmission to partners during ATI (Time to rebound Mean: 0.4 and Fixed duration Mean: 11), compared to participant health risks from ATI (Time to Rebound Mean: -.9 and Fixed duration Mean: 0.0). With regard to feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy respectively, mitigation efforts rated positively included: requiring counseling for potential participants (Means: 2.3; 2.1; and 1.1), providing partner referrals for PrEP (Means: 1.3; 1.3; 1.5), providing pre-exposure proxylaxis directly to partners (Means: 1.0; 1.5; 1.6), and monitoring participants for new sexually transmitted disease acquisition (Means: 1.9; 1.4; 1.0). Respondents were less positive about requiring that participants' sexual partner(s) participate in risk counseling or limiting participation to those who commit to abstaining from sex during the entire ATI period. Our study demonstrates that HIV remission trial investigators and study team members are concerned about the risk of transmission to sexual partners during ATI. Separating the assessment of risk mitigation strategies for transmission risk into feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy allows the discovery of strategies that may best achieve all three outcomes. Additional research is needed to compare these more fine-grained assessments with views held by other investigators, people living with HIV, and trial participants.

Perceptions of Risks and Benefits of Participating in HIV Cure-Related Research Among Diverse Young Adults Living with HIV in the United States: Qualitative Research Findings

In the United States, young adults have the highest rates of new HIV infections, and are less likely to be aware of their infection, be engaged in care, or achieve HIV viral suppression. As biomedical HIV research increasingly focuses on achieving long-term suppression without antiretroviral therapy (ART) and finding an HIV cure, little is known about perceptions of young adults living with HIV (YLWH) regarding HIV cure research. We recruited a diverse sample of 20 YLWH (18-29 years old) to participate in individual semistructured qualitative interviews to explore knowledge and perceptions of HIV cure research, and motivations and barriers to participation. Most participants had little knowledge of HIV cure research. Motivators of HIV cure research participation included altruism, stigma reduction, and the elimination of the clinical burdens of HIV. Barriers included potential physical side effects, psychological distress, the possibility of disclosure as a result of participating, and the amount of time required to participate. Most participants had concerns about analytic treatment interruptions (i.e., ART interruption to assess HIV remission), and indicated that they would want more frequent laboratory testing and protection for their sex partners during this time. Finally, participants suggested that, if other YLWH are considering participation in cure research, they should first learn as much as possible about the research, and then consider the potential personal benefits and the contribution that they could make to science and their communities. As HIV cure research advances, the participation of YLWH will be critical. Our study provides knowledge about how YLWH view HIV cure research. More sociobehavioral research is needed to ensure that those who are most likely to be the decision-makers and beneficiaries of an HIV cure are included at all levels of research.

"It comes altogether as one:" perceptions of analytical treatment interruptions and partner protections among racial, ethnic, sex and gender diverse HIV serodifferent couples in the United States

BACKGROUND

Most HIV cure-related studies involve interrupting antiretroviral treatment to assess the efficacy of pharmacologic interventions - also known as analytical treatment interruptions (ATIs). ATIs imply the risk of passing HIV to sexual partners due to the loss of undetectable HIV status. There has been a notable lack of attention paid to perceptions of ATIs among racial, ethnic, sex and gender minorities, and HIV serodifferent couples. These populations are among those most impacted by HIV in the United States. Future HIV cure research paradigms should equitably include considerations from these groups.

METHODS

From August - October 2020, we conducted in-depth interviews with 10 racial, ethnic, sex, and gender minority HIV serodifferent couples in geographically diverse regions of the United States to understand their perspectives about ATIs and partner protection measures to prevent secondary HIV transmissions because of participation in ATI studies. We used framework analysis to analyze the qualitative data.

RESULTS

Of the 10 couples recruited, four identified as a gay couple, two as a gay and bisexual couple, two as a heterosexual couple, one as a gay and queer couple, and one as a queer couple. We found that HIV serodifferent couples in our study viewed ATIs as contradicting HIV treatment adherence messages. Couples expressed discomfort around ATIs in HIV cure research. They were concerned with the return of HIV detectability and worried ATIs might result in secondary HIV transmission. Participants were strongly in favor of using a range of partner protection measures during ATIs that included PrEP, HIV risk reduction counseling, and alternatives for penetrative sex practices. Couples also recommended that sex partners be consulted or involved as part of ATI trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight new potential opportunities and strategies to mitigate risk of HIV transmission during ATIs among key groups historically under-represented in HIV cure research. Findings also underscore the relational aspects of ATI trials. We provide preliminary considerations for planning ATI trials with diverse HIV serodifferent partners. Future studies should continue to explore these issues among other types of partnerships, cultures, and socio-cultural settings.

Attitudes About Analytic Treatment Interruption (ATI) in HIV Remission Trials with Different Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) Resumption Criteria

HIV remission trials often require temporary stopping of antiretroviral therapy (ART)-an approach called analytic treatment interruption (ATI). Trial designs resulting in viremia raise risks for participants and sexual partners. We conducted a survey on attitudes about remission trials, comparing ART resumption criteria (lower-risk "time to rebound" and higher-risk "sustained viremia") among participants from an acute HIV cohort in Thailand. Analyses included Wilcoxon-Ranks and multivariate logistic analysis. Most of 408 respondents supported ATI trials, with slightly higher approval of, and willingness to participate in, trials using time to rebound versus sustained viremia criteria. Less than half of respondents anticipated disclosing trial participation to partners and over half indicated uncertainty or unwillingness about whether partners would be willing to use PrEP. Willingness to participate was higher among those who rated higher trial approval, lower anticipated burden, and those expecting to make the decision independently. Our findings support acceptability of ATI trials among most respondents. Participant attitudes and anticipated behaviors, especially related to transmission risk, have implications for future trial design and informed consent.

Ethical and practical considerations for cell and gene therapy toward an HIV cure: findings from a qualitative in-depth interview study in the United States

BACKGROUND

HIV cure research involving cell and gene therapy has intensified in recent years. There is a growing need to identify ethical standards and safeguards to ensure cell and gene therapy (CGT) HIV cure research remains valued and acceptable to as many stakeholders as possible as it advances on a global scale.

METHODS

To elicit preliminary ethical and practical considerations to guide CGT HIV cure research, we implemented a qualitative, in-depth interview study with three key stakeholder groups in the United States: (1) biomedical HIV cure researchers, (2) bioethicists, and (3) community stakeholders. Interviews permitted evaluation of informants' perspectives on how CGT HIV cure research should ethically occur, and were transcribed verbatim. We applied conventional content analysis focused on inductive reasoning to analyze the rich qualitative data and derive key ethical and practical considerations related to CGT towards an HIV cure.

RESULTS

We interviewed 13 biomedical researchers, 5 community members, and 1 bioethicist. Informants generated considerations related to: perceived benefits of CGT towards an HIV cure, perceived risks, considerations necessary to ensure an acceptable benefit/risk balance, CGT strategies considered unacceptable, additional ethical considerations, and considerations for first-in-human CGT HIV cure trials. Informants also proposed important safeguards to developing CGT approaches towards an HIV cure, such as the importance of mitigating off-target effects, mitigating risks associated with long-term duration of CGT interventions, and mitigating risks of immune overreactions.

CONCLUSION

Our study identified preliminary considerations for CGT-based HIV cure across three key stakeholder groups. Respondents identified an ideal cure strategy as one which would durably control HIV infection, protect the individual from re-acquisition, and eliminate transmission to others. Known and unknown risks should be anticipated and perceived as learning opportunities to preserve and honor the altruism of participants. Preclinical studies should support these considerations and be transparently reviewed by regulatory experts and peers prior to first-in-human studies. To protect the public trust in CGT HIV cure research, ethical and practical considerations should be periodically revisited and updated as the science continues to evolve. Additional ethics studies are required to expand stakeholder participation to include traditionally marginalized groups and clinical care providers.

Considerations for Increasing Racial, Ethnic, Gender, and Sexual Diversity in HIV Cure-Related Research with Analytical Treatment Interruptions: A Qualitative Inquiry

Despite disproportionate incidence and prevalence of HIV among transgender individuals, cisgender women, and racial and ethnic minority groups, all remain underrepresented in HIV cure research. As HIV cure trials are scaled up, there is emerging research on ways to mitigate risks of HIV acquisition for sexual partners of analytical treatment interruption (ATI) trial participants. As such, it is imperative that HIV cure researchers consider the implications of implementing ATIs in populations that are disproportionately affected by HIV, but largely underrepresented in trials to date. In this qualitative study, we sought to derive triangulated perspectives on the social and ethical implications regarding ATIs and partner protection strategies during ATIs among under-represented populations. We conducted 21 in-depth interviews with 5 types of informants: bioethicists, community members [people living with HIV (PLWH) and their advocates], biomedical HIV cure researchers, sociobehavioral scientists, and HIV care providers. We analyzed the data using conventional content analysis and reduced the data to important considerations for implementing ATI trials in diverse communities and settings. Our study revealed the following key themes: (1) attention must be paid to gender and power dynamics in ATI trials; (2) ATI trials should be designed and implemented through the lenses of intersectionality and equity frameworks; (3) ATI trials may have both positive and negative effects on stigma for PLWH and their partners; and (4) partnership dynamics should be considered when designing ATI protocols. Our study generated actionable considerations that could be implemented in ATI trials to promote their acceptability to communities that have been underrepresented in HIV cure research to date. Research teams must invest in robust community and stakeholder engagement to define best practices. Paying attention to representation and equity will also promote better and more equitable implementation of HIV cure strategies once these become ready for rollout.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Ethical considerations for HIV remission clinical research involving participants diagnosed during acute HIV infection

HIV remission clinical researchers are increasingly seeking study participants who are diagnosed and treated during acute HIV infection—the brief period between infection and the point when the body creates detectable HIV antibodies. This earliest stage of infection is often marked by flu-like illness and may be an especially tumultuous period of confusion, guilt, anger, and uncertainty. Such experiences may present added ethical challenges for HIV research recruitment, participation, and retention. The purpose of this paper is to identify potential ethical challenges associated with involving acutely diagnosed people living with HIV in remission research and considerations for how to mitigate them. We identify three domains of potential ethical concern for clinicians, researchers, and ethics committee members to consider: 1) Recruitment and informed consent; (2) Transmission risks and partner protection; and (3) Ancillary and continuing care. We discuss each of these domains with the aim of inspiring further work to advance the ethical conduct of HIV remission research. For example, experiences of confusion and uncertainty regarding illness and diagnosis during acute HIV infection may complicate informed consent procedures in studies that seek to recruit directly after diagnosis. To address this, it may be appropriate to use staged re-consent procedures or comprehension assessment. Responsible conduct of research requires a broad understanding of acute HIV infection that encompasses its biomedical, psychological, social, and behavioral dimensions. We argue that the lived experience of acute HIV infection may introduce ethical concerns that researchers and reviewers should address during study design and ethical approval.

Ethics of HIV and hepatitis B cure research

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Achieving a cure for HIV or hepatitis B virus (HBV) is expected to have a range of salutary effects including eliminating the need for continued treatments, minimizing risk to sexual and injecting partners, reducing prevalence, and decreasing stigma. Nevertheless, conducting research to achieve such laudable goals is necessarily associated with a broad set of ethical challenges. This review aims at describing key findings from selected peer-reviewed literature published in the last 2 years (2018-2019) that enhance understanding of some of these issues.

RECENT FINDINGS

A variety of ethical issues in HIV cure research have been informed by recent conceptual and empirical scholarship. These include: analytical treatment interruptions; attitudes towards participation; responsibilities to nonparticipants; consent and terminology; and selected other issues.

SUMMARY

Understanding of the ethical issues in HIV cure research has been enhanced by sustained normative and empirical scholarship with a range of stakeholders. This work has crucial implications for HBV cure research, but there is also a pressing need for directed work on HBV cure research. In both HIV and HBV cure research, such scholarship promises to help ensure that critically important research efforts are ethically sound.

COVID-19 controlled human infection studies: worries about local community impact and demands for local engagement

In spring, summer and autumn 2020, one abiding argument against controlled human infection (CHI) studies of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines has been their impact on local communities. Leading scientists and bioethicists expressed concern about undue usage of local residents' direly needed scarce resources at a time of great need and even about their unintended infection. They recommended either avoiding CHI trials or engaging local communities before conducting any CHIs. Similar recommendations were not made for the alternative-standard phase III field trials of these same vaccines. We argue that the health effects of CHI studies on local residents not participating in the study tend to be smaller and more positive than those of field trials. That is all the more so now that tested vaccines are being rolled out. Whether or not local community engagement is necessary for urgent vaccine studies in the pandemic, the case for its engagement is stronger prior to field trials than prior to CHI studies.

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.

Ethical and practical considerations for mitigating risks to sexual partners during analytical treatment interruptions in HIV cure-related research

BACKGROUND

Background: Analytical treatment interruptions (ATIs) in HIV cure-related research can result in trial participants becoming viremic with HIV, placing HIV-negative sexual partners at elevated risk of acquiring HIV.

OBJECTIVE

Objective:Our study aimed to generate ethical and practical considerations for designing and implementing appropriate risk mitigation strategies to reduce unintended HIV transmission events during ATIs.

METHODS

Methods: We conducted 21 in-depth interviews with five types of informants: bioethicists, community members, biomedical HIV cure researchers, socio-behavioral scientists/epidemiologists, and HIV care providers. We used conventional content analysis to analyze the data and generate considerations.

RESULTS

Results: Key findings include: 1) Ethical permissibility of ATI trials depends on due diligence and informed consent to mitigate risks to participants and their sexual partners; 2) Participants should receive adequate support and/or counseling if they choose to disclose ATI participation to their partners; 3) Measures to protect sexual partners of trial participants from HIV transmission during ATIs should include referral to and/or provision of pre-exposure prophylaxis, as well as other available means of preventing HIV transmission; 4) There is uncertainty regarding the appropriate management of emerging sexually transmitted infections during ATI trials and possible protection measures for multiple and/or anonymous partners of ATI trial participants.

CONCLUSION

Conclusion: While there is no way to completely eliminate the risk of HIV transmission to sexual partners during ATIs, HIV cure trialists and sponsors should consider the ethical concerns related to the sexual partners of ATI participants. Doing so is essential to ensuring the welfare of participants, their partners and the trustworthiness of research.

The Ethics of Research That May Disadvantage Others

In prospective interventional research, a treatment may provide an advantage for the recipient over other people who do not receive it. If the intervention proves successful, the treated are better able to compete for such things as a scarce ventilator, a class grade, or a litigation outcome, potentially risking the deaths, jobs, or incomes of nontreated persons. Discussions of ethical concerns related to "bystanders" have typically focused on direct harms (such as infecting them with a virus), rather than the competition for a rivalrous good (such as a ventilator or clinical outcome). After broadly scoping this problem of advantage, this article reveals several reasons that such interventional research is typically permissible, notwithstanding the potential setbacks to nonparticipants. I consider the almost-dispositive concept of clinical equipoise and then glean insights from the harm principle, status quo bias, the leveling-down problem, and a potential bias against prospective interventional research versus program interventions with retrospective study. My consideration of institutional relationships does not change the analysis that such research is permissible.

Human Challenge Studies to Accelerate Coronavirus Vaccine Licensure

Controlled human challenge trials of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates could accelerate the testing and potential rollout of efficacious vaccines. By replacing conventional phase 3 testing of vaccine candidates, such trials may subtract many months from the licensure process, making efficacious vaccines available more quickly. Obviously, challenging volunteers with this live virus risks inducing severe disease and possibly even death. However, we argue that such studies, by accelerating vaccine evaluation, could reduce the global burden of coronavirus-related mortality and morbidity. Volunteers in such studies could autonomously authorize the risks to themselves, and their net risk could be acceptable if participants comprise healthy young adults, who are at relatively low risk of serious disease following natural infection, if they have a high baseline risk of natural infection, and if during the trial they receive frequent monitoring and, following any infection, the best available care.

A collaborative, multidisciplinary approach to HIV transmission risk mitigation during analytic treatment interruption

Analytic treatment interruptions (ATIs) are currently the standard for assessing the impact of experimental interventions aimed at inducing sustained antiretroviral therapy (ART)-free remission in trials related to HIV cure. ATIs are associated with substantial risk to both study participants and their sexual partner(s). Two documented HIV transmissions occurring in the context of ATIs have been recently reported, but recommendations for mitigating the risk of such events during ATIs are limited. We outline a practical approach to risk mitigation during ATI studies and describe strategies we are utilising in an upcoming clinical trial that may be applicable to other centres.

Differences in HIV cure clinical trial preferences of French people living with HIV and physicians in the ANRS-APSEC study: a discrete choice experiment

INTRODUCTION

Despite the advent of HIV cure-related clinical trials (HCRCT) for people living with HIV (PLWH), the risks and uncertainty involved raise ethical issues. Although research has provided insights into the levers and barriers to PLWH and physicians' participation in these trials, no information exists about stakeholders' preferences for HCRCT attributes, about the different ways PLWH and physicians value future HCRCT, or about how personal characteristics affect these preferences. The results from the present study will inform researchers' decisions about the most suitable HCRCT strategies to implement, and help them ensure ethical recruitment and well-designed informed consent.

METHODS

Between October 2016 and March 2017, a discrete choice experiment was conducted among 195 virally controlled PLWH and 160 physicians from 24 French HIV centres. Profiles within each group, based on individual characteristics, were obtained using hierarchical clustering. Trade-offs between five HCRCT attributes (trial duration, consultation frequency, moderate (digestive disorders, flu-type syndrome, fatigue) and severe (allergy, infections, risk of cancer) side effects (SE), outcomes) and utilities associated with four HCRCT candidates (latency reactivation, immunotherapy, gene therapy and a combination of latency reactivation and immunotherapy), were estimated using a mixed logit model.

RESULTS

Apart from severe SE - the most decisive attribute in both groups - PLWH and physicians made different trade-offs between HCRCT attributes, the latter being more concerned about outcomes, the former about the burden of participation (consultation frequency and moderate SE). These different trades-offs resulted in differences in preferences regarding the four candidate HCRCT. PLWH significantly preferred immunotherapy, whereas physicians preferred immunotherapy and combined therapy. Despite the heterogeneity of characteristics within the PLWH and physician profiles, results show some homogeneity in trade-offs and utilities regarding HCRCT.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe SE, not outcomes, was the most decisive attribute determining future HCRCT participation. Particular attention should be paid to providing clear information, in particular on severe SE, to potential participants. Immunotherapy would appear to be the best HCRCT candidate for both PLWH and physicians. However, if the risk of cancer could be avoided, gene therapy would become the preferred strategy for the latter and the second choice for the former.