Pregnancy and the global disease burden

Pregnant women experience unique physiological changes pertinent to the effective prevention and treatment of common diseases that affect their health and the health of their developing fetuses. In this paper, the impact of major communicable (HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, helminth infections, emerging epidemic viral infections) as well as non-communicable conditions (mental illness, substance abuse, gestational diabetes, eclampsia) on pregnancy is discussed. The current state of research involving pregnant women in these areas is also described, highlighting important knowledge gaps for the management of key illnesses that impact pregnancy globally.

Placebo orthodoxy and the double standard of care in multinational clinical research

It has been almost 20 years since the field of bioethics was galvanized by a controversial series of multinational AZT trials employing placebo controls on pregnant HIV-positive women in the developing world even though a standard of care existed in the sponsor countries. The trove of ethical investigations that followed was thoughtful and challenging, yet an important and problematic methodological assumption was left unexplored. In this article, I revisit the famous "double standard of care" case study in order to offer novel consideration of the placebo orthodoxy that underlies much of the ethical debate. This majority view found in medical research is that placebo-controlled trials are methodologically superior to comparative trials that use active controls. I challenge this orthodoxy and argue that lives were unnecessarily lost in these trials as a result. Furthermore, current HIV research on vaccines and microbicides is now poised to repeat the error of subscribing to the placebo orthodoxy.

Ethical issues for late-stage trials of multipurpose prevention technologies for HIV and pregnancy

Multipurpose prevention technologies (MPTs) designed to simultaneously prevent pregnancy and HIV could provide urgently needed tools to address unmet sexual and reproductive health needs of women worldwide. Late-stage clinical trials will be complex given the need to demonstrate efficacy for HIV and contraceptive indications simultaneously from a single product. Currently, HIV and pregnancy prevention trials have distinctive design features that will need to be reconciled in MPT trials. This article identifies several ethical issues uniquely associated with this research that will benefit from future deliberation and guidance to ensure that this globally important research can proceed efficiently and expeditiously.

Ensuring Access to HIV Prevention Services in South African HIV Vaccine Trials: Correspondence Between Guidelines and Practices

Researchers and sponsors are required to assist HIV prevention trial participants to remain HIV-uninfected by ensuring access to prevention services. Ethics guidelines require that these HIV risk-reduction services be state of the art. This and related ethics recommendations have been intensely debated. This descriptive study aimed to identify actual HIV prevention practices for two HIV vaccine trials at five South African sites, to explore whether actual practices meet guideline recommendations and to discuss implications for practices and ethics guidelines. Practices were examined through a review of site documents and interviews with site staff and network representatives, as well as community advisory board and research ethics committee representatives. A thematic analysis of HIV prevention practices, perspectives and perceived challenges was undertaken. Findings indicated that there was a high degree of correspondence between actual practices in South African HIV vaccine trials and guideline recommendations. Key challenges for implementing prevention services were identified as partnerships, provider-promotion of services and participant uptake of services. Practices deviated most from guidelines with regard to the description of prevention plans in informed consent forms. Recommendations are made for both practices and ethics guidelines.

Improving ethical and participatory practice for marginalized populations in biomedical HIV prevention trials: lessons from Thailand

Background

This paper presents findings from a qualitative investigation of ethical and participatory issues related to the conduct of biomedical HIV prevention trials among marginalized populations in Thailand. This research was deemed important to conduct, as several large-scale biomedical HIV prevention trials among marginalized populations had closed prematurely in other countries, and a better understanding of how to prevent similar trial closures from occurring in the future was desired.

Methods

In-depth key informant interviews were held in Bangkok and Chiang Mai, Thailand. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, translated and thematically analyzed. The Good Participatory Practice Guidelines for Biomedical HIV Prevention Trials (GPP) guided this work.

Results

Fourteen interviews were conducted: 10 with policymakers, academic and community-based researchers and trial staff and four with representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Suggested ways to improve ethical and participatory practice centered on standards of HIV prevention, informed consent, communication and human rights. In particular, the need to overcome language and literacy differences was identified. Key informants felt communication was the basis of ethical understanding and trust within biomedical HIV prevention trial contexts, and thus fundamental to trial participants' ability to exercise free will.

Discussion

Biomedical HIV prevention trials present opportunities for inclusive and productive ethical and participatory practice. Key informants suggested that efforts to improve practice could result in better relationships between research stakeholders and research investigative teams and by extension, better, more ethical participatory trials. This research took place in Thailand and its findings apply primarily to Thailand. However, given the universality of many ethical considerations, the results of this study can inform the improvement of ethical and participatory practice in other parts of the world where biomedical HIV prevention trials occur, and where clinical trials in marginalized populations continue.

Ancillary care in South African HIV vaccine trials: addressing needs, drafting protocols, and engaging community

There has been debate about sponsor-investigator ethical responsibilities to address participants' medical needs in trials in resource-constrained contexts. Certain ethical guidelines make detailed recommendations. This study explored whether ethical guideline recommendations for care in HIV vaccine trials were being met, and whether stakeholders were facing difficulties addressed by guidelines. It sampled key stakeholders involved in two trials across five sites in South Africa, and reviewed relevant documentation. It concluded that sites were largely meeting guideline recommendations for addressing needs, with some exceeding these. Recommendations for writing protocols were only partially achieved. Recommendations for engaging participating community were mostly met, except for "moral negotiation" recommendations. Suggestions are made to strengthen practices, and to improve guidelines so they address empirical concerns.

How good is "good enough"? The case for varying standards of evidence according to need for new interventions in HIV prevention

In 2010, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of two different biomedical strategies to prevent HIV infection had positive findings. However, despite ongoing very high levels of HIV infection in some countries and population groups, it has been made clear by regulatory authorities that the evidence remains insufficient to support either product being made available outside of research contexts in the developing world for at least two years. In addition, prevention trials in endemic areas will continue to test new interventions against placebo. But the judgments of evidentiary standards are never value-neutral. Using the recent trials and their contexts as case studies, we examine the basis for these decisions, which will potentially delay access to scientific innovation to the people who are most urgently in need of it.