Mapping Pathways Launches NEW Report - "Community-driven strategies for the use of ARVs as prevention: United States Workshop Report"

The Mapping Pathways United States Workshop Report is launched today, providing the results of three HIV prevention scenario-development workshops held in 2013 in the United States.

The "Community-driven strategies for the use of antiretrovirals as prevention: United States Workshop Report" analyses, aggregates and synthesises different factors, issues, and drivers identified by workshop participants and constructs a future scenario for HIV prevention strategies using ARV (antiretroviral) drugs in the United States. Integration - of factors and systems involved in both treatment and prevention - is the main driver of success.

We hope you will read the report and utilize it in your organizational/jurisdictional planning processes for HIV prevention and care services. Please share the report with colleagues you think will be interested.

 In 2013, a subset of the Mapping Pathways team conducted knowledge-exchange workshops in San

Atlanta workshop participants

Francisco, Atlanta, and Washington, D.C., to further share the findings of our 2013 report ("Developing evidence-based, people-centred strategies for the use of antiretrovirals as prevention") and to continue enhancing the community-driven, locally informed approach to the wider evidence base for ARV-based prevention.

The cities were selected based on geographic diversity as well as the diversity of experience and expertise that can be found in each setting.

All three workshops included a mix of approximately 20 researchers, advocates, policy experts, public health officials, and service providers; they were diverse in terms of age, race, gender identity, sexuality, sero-status, and years in the field, with a blend of local to national experiences and perspectives.

Participants collaboratively developed a range of future scenarios and potential strategies linked to prevention programming goals and objectives. They were asked to think ahead to the year 2025, and envision an array of outcomes associated with the implementation of ARV-based prevention.

Based on participant ideas and concepts synthesised across all three workshops, we developed a ‘Mapping Pathways’ scenario for the future which has a strongly integrated approach at its core. The main driver of this future scenario is one of integration across political, economic, social, educational, and technological factors, and integration across the broader scientific, healthcare, and delivery systems. This means that we integrate both treatment and prevention strategies, including how we develop them, how we fund them, and how we deliver them, into one holistic approach.

Political and economic factors considered by workshop participants

The Mapping Pathways scenario was informed by these key themes common to all the workshops:

• Participants emphasised the need for a more holistic approach to HIV services in which prevention and treatment were not seen as mutually exclusive.

• Social and behavioral research must be supported and integrated with biomedical research.

• Digital web and device-based technologies and information sharing will affect access, uptake, and adherence.

• The Affordable Care Act (ACA) offers major opportunities for expanding access to healthcare, and poses challenges in HIV prevention and care delivery as the landscape evolves.

• Community-based organizations have a leading role to play in the new healthcare paradigm being ushered in with the ACA. They can help generate political will, drive research agendas, and deliver integrated care to communities and populations in need.

• Diversified funding streams are needed, and many of the optimistic scenarios generated by participants included strategies to engage a wide range of funders.

Click here for the United States Workshop Report.

[Please look for us on Facebook here www.facebook.com/MappingPathways and you can follow us on Twitter @mappingpathways as well.]

IRIN Coverage of Mapping Pathways ARV-Based Prevention Report: “Here’s all this science - now what?”

via IRIN

 Excerpt:
According to Mapping Pathways, the ideal approach to implementing treatment as prevention should consider not only the clinical goal of efficacy (works in a lab), but also effectiveness (how to apply the solution in a community).

“I know that if you get anti-retroviral drugs into someone’s blood, they suppress the virus. We have amazing proof of that - it’s a major scientific breakthrough in the history of humankind,” said Linda-Gail Bekker, chief operating officer of the Desmond Tutu HIV Foundation, based in South Africa.

“But now we have to put this together so it works, which means engaging with a wide range of human beings who live very different lives than those of us who run these programmes might imagine,” she said.

Effectiveness requires behaviour change and, therefore, varies across cultures, governments, and communities based on “the firms that produce the drugs, the healthcare clinics that deliver the drugs, the community centres that provide education, and the partnerships developed,” according to Mapping Pathways.

“Human beings will behave like human beings. What does that mean? Well, social sciences have been trying to figure that out for centuries and don’t have one single theory, so why should our HIV programmes?” asked Bekker.

“The notion that in HIV programmes `one size fits all’ has backfired on us and it has been a humbling moment for those of us who work in this field.”

Read the whole article on IRIN.


[Please look for us on Facebook here www.facebook.com/MappingPathways and you can follow us on Twitter @mappingpathways as well.]

Podcast: Mapping Pathways' San Francisco "Knowledge Exchange Workshop" - More Robust, Better Resourced Behavioral and Implementation Science is Needed!

Jim and Jessica from the Mapping Pathways team have podcasted again!

This new 12-minute podcast (click to listen) was produced by AIDS Foundation of Chicago (a Mapping Pathways partner) and is the fourth in a series of discussions inspired by our new report "Developing Evidence-Based, People-Centred Strategies for the Use of Antiretrovirals as Prevention."

In this new podcast,  Jim and Jessica talk about the recent Mapping Pathways "Knowledge Exchange Workshop" at the beautiful San Francisco AIDS Foundation which included researchers, public health officials, policy experts, advocates, and prevention staffers from the Bay Area. Our report provided the backdrop - and the launch pad - for rich discussion/debate and a series of future-thinking exercises focued on ARV-based prevention strategies and scenario planning. The above pic is an "action shot" from the workshop.

Big take-aways from our two days together include the need for more robust (and better resourced) behavioral science and implementation projects - and for advocacy devoted to both these areas. We have vaccine advocates, microbicide advocates, treatment advocates, PrEP advocates.... it's about time we have some concerted advocacy for behavioral science and implementation science too! Without more attention and adequate funding for these activities - it won't matter how efficacious a biomedical tool proves to be in a clinical trial. Things like PrEP, etc.  need to work in the REAL world - which a clinical trial does not accurately represent .

Here are the presentation slides used during the workshop.

Other podcasts

Click here for previous podcasts on topics like PEP and PrEP.

And please stay tuned for future podcasts on topics like microbicides, the use of treatment for prevention, and more. Feel free to leave comments or questions here, on the podcast itself, of by sending an email to mappingpathways@gmail.com. [Content that is linked from other sources is for informational purposes and should not construe a Mapping Pathways position. Please look for us on Facebook here www.facebook.com/MappingPathways and you can follow us on Twitter @mappingpathways as well.]

NEW Podcast on the Promise of PEP, and the Unfortunate Lack of PEP Implementation

Jim and Jessica (pictured above) from the Mapping Pathways team are back with a new podcast - and this time the topic is PEP - post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention.

This 12-minute podcast (click to listen) was produced by AIDS Foundation of Chicago (a Mapping Pathways partner) and is the third in a series of discussions inspired by the new report "Developing Evidence-Based, People-Centred Strategies for the Use of Antiretrovirals as Prevention."

In this new podcast,  Jessica Terlikowski and Jim Pickett discuss the promise of PEP, and the unfortunate lack of strong implementation that characterizes this intervention in nearly every part of the world.

Other podcasts

Click here for a previous podcast in which Jessica and Jim  introduce the Mapping Pathways report (published by Mapping Pathways partner RAND) and explain its relevance for multiple audiences. Click here for their second podcast where they chat about PrEP - pre-exposure prophylaxis.

Please stay tuned for future podcasts on topics like microbicides, the use of treatment for prevention, and more. Feel free to leave comments or questions here, on the podcast itself, of by sending an email to mappingpathways@gmail.com.

[ Please look for us on Facebook here www.facebook.com/MappingPathways and you can follow us on Twitter @mappingpathways as well.]

Podcast: A Little PrEP Talk Inspired by New Mapping Pathways Report

This 10-minute podcast (click to listen) was produced by AIDS Foundation of Chicago (AFC) and is the second in a series of discussions inspired by "Developing Evidence-Based, People-Centred Strategies for the Use of Antiretrovirals as Prevention."

This new Mapping Pathways report was published 19 June 2013 by RAND Europe and AFC.

In this new podcast, AFC staffers and Mapping Pathways team members Jessica Terlikowski and Jim Pickett chat about PrEP - pre-exposure prophylaxis.

Click here for Jessica and Jim's previous podcast - posted June 21, 2013 -  which introduces the report and talks about why it is relevant for multiple audiences.

Keep your eyes and ears open.

Jessica and Jim will be back soon to talk about the other ARV-based prevention strategies that were explored in the report: PEP (post-exposure prophylaxis), TLC+ (testing, linkage to care, plus treatment) and microbicides. And you will find out about it right here.


[ Please look for us on Facebook here www.facebook.com/MappingPathways and you can follow us on Twitter @mappingpathways as well.]

PODCAST: Mapping Pathways Team Talks About Our New Report on ARV-based Prevention

Snapshot of the global epidemic, highlighting India, South Africa and the U.S. where Mapping Pathways collected data. From the new report.

This 14-minute podcast (click below to listen) was produced by AIDS Foundation of Chicago (AFC) and kicks off a series of discussions about "Developing Evidence-Based, People-Centred Strategies for the Use of Antiretrovirals as Prevention" the new Mapping Pathways report published 19 June 2013 by RAND Europe and AFC.

AFC staffers and Mapping Pathways team members Jessica Terlikowski and Jim Pickett introduce the report and talk about why it is both interesting and useful.

Jessica and Jim will be back to talk more in depth about each of the ARV-based prevention strategies that were explored: PEP (post-exposure prophylaxis), PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis), TLC+ (testing, linkage to care, plus treatment) and microbicides. Watch - and listen - to this space!



Mapping Pathways Partners

Mapping Pathways Podcast: Intro by AIDSChicago

[Please look for us on Facebook here www.facebook.com/MappingPathways and you can follow us on Twitter @mappingpathways as well.]

New International Report on HIV Prevention Urges Localized Consideration of Antiretroviral Strategies

First Report on Antiretroviral Drugs for HIV Prevention to Bring Science Together with the Wisdom of Communities

June 19, 2013 – To make an impact on new HIV infections globally, antiretroviral (ARV)-based HIV prevention strategies need to be closely tailored to local contexts and cultures, according to a new report released today by RAND Europe and AIDS Foundation of Chicago.

“‘Mapping Pathways: Developing Evidence-Based, People-Centred Strategies for the Use of Antiretrovirals as Prevention’ [available by open access online on the RAND Europe website, and on the Mapping Pathways blog] provides an important resource to help communities, prevention programmers, funders and policymakers decide whether, and how, an ARV-based strategy could work in their locality,” said Jim Pickett, director of prevention advocacy at AIDS Foundation of Chicago and project director.

Last year, more than 2 million people globally became infected with HIV suggesting current prevention strategies are not doing enough to halt HIV transmission. Research suggests that some of the most promising prevention strategies are based on ARV drugs, such as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and treatment.

“However, just because we know that ARVs can prevent HIV infection does not mean that we will, in practice, successfully implement their use in communities that need them,” said lead author Molly Morgan Jones, research leader at RAND Europe in Cambridge, UK.

Mapping Pathways is a community-led research project on the strategic use of ARV drugs for HIV prevention, involving RAND Europe, AIDS Foundation of Chicago and other partners in India, South Africa and the United States.

The group engaged more than 1,000 community respondents with an online survey and interviewed several dozen key stakeholders, including policy experts, program implementers, health care professionals and advocates. Participants rated the importance of various ARV-based prevention strategies, shared their perspectives regarding barriers to implementation and suggested the kinds of information they needed to make informed decisions about whether to implement any ARV-based strategy.


Click to enlarge

Additionally, an extensive literature review was conducted during 2011 and 2012 to assess the published scientific evidence. Detailed snapshots from these activities are highlighted in the report and provide rich, localized context that reveal the opinions and concerns of a wide array of individuals and underscore important gaps in the evidence.

Community members and key stakeholders in each country consistently agreed they must address three key challenges in order to maximize the prevention potential of ARV drugs:

• First, structural issues such as community-level living conditions that affect access, such as proximity to appropriate health care and other social determinants of health, are as important as individual-level behaviors.

• Second, more information about implementation is needed by policymakers, funders and prevention programmers in order to determine what mix of ARV-based prevention strategies, if any, are appropriate.

• The third challenge is to adapt ARV-based prevention strategies for local contexts, as reflected in the book’s foreword written by Archbishop Desmond Tutu (“All science is local”).

The research found that within each country, and among varied types of people, the same sets of scientific data were interpreted and framed in different ways depending on the local context and perspectives. For instance, participants in South Africa and India tended to view the scientific data with more skepticism than individuals from the United States, so the successful adoption of ARV-based prevention strategies, such as PrEP, requires consideration of both the science and the local context.

 “It is important to marry the published evidence with the wisdom of communities to make decisions on prevention programming that make sense locally, for communities to map out their own, unique pathways,” Jones said.

Moving forward, there are many considerations for the use of ARVs as prevention in localities.

“Different countries and communities are at different places,” said Dr. Linda-Gail Bekker, deputy director of the Desmond Tutu HIV Foundation in South Africa and a Mapping Pathways partner. “We all have to ask policymakers, funders, and ourselves a host of questions. How will we implement a certain strategy? How will we pay for it? Is it for the generalized epidemic or is it only for certain key populations? What are the social factors that make certain populations vulnerable? Is this strategy ethical? Does it make sound public health sense? What won’t be afforded if we go this route? Who will benefit if we do?

“Meanwhile, we must continue to advocate and conduct implementation science so that we can show policymakers what is feasible and what the impact in the public sector could be.”


[Please look for us on Facebook here www.facebook.com/MappingPathways and you can follow us on Twitter @mappingpathways as well.]

Providing a range of prevention options: In conversation with Linda-Gail Bekker

Original content from our Mapping Pathways blog team

We need options. Not everyone in the world is a good pill taker. Like so many things in life, we may realise that people need different prevention options since they have different personalities.

In the final part of this five-part series, Linda-Gail Bekker of the Desmond Tutu HIV Centre, a Mapping Pathways partner organisation, speaks about the importance of adherence, both in clinical trials and the real world, and the challenges and issues facing adolescents. Read parts one, two, three and four

MP: You have mentioned adolescents as a particular vulnerable group in South Africa. In an interview conducted earlier this year, your colleague, Dr. Melissa Wallace, also talked about adolescents as an especially at-risk group. What are some factors that make them so vulnerable?

LGB: One particular reason why adolescents are highly at risk for HIV is because many are at the stage of their lives where they may be experimenting with their sexuality. They may also find themselves in relationships where negotiating condoms may be incredibly difficult.

This maybe the case with younger women whose relationships can be with older men and young MSM outing themselves for the first time and who may then choose to go out with older men.  In that situation, being able to use a PrEP tablet discreetly and under their own control could be a life-saving step.

So putting prevention into the hands of the vulnerable becomes a very important tool. But we can only do this if we are sure it’s safe in this population, which requires carefully run clinical research in order to adequately test the product in the relevant populations.

This requires resources and investment from sponsors and funding agencies even though this is often regarded as “high risk investment”. In that regard, I’m delighted that we’ll be starting an MP3 project (methods of prevention) based on a grant awarded to us by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to look at PrEP and other biomedical prevention modalities in adolescents between 14-17 years old.

MP: Adherence is an issue that has come up quite a bit this year, from M2012 to AIDS 2012. How much are people talking about adherence and about taking lessons learned from trials into the real world?

LGB: Adherence is the Achilles heel of the HIV prevention and treatment worlds. This is where biology meets behavior. We know that the pill is efficacious – Partners PrEP showed that beautifully. In fact, every single one of the clinical trials has shown that once adherence increases there is a direct correlation with efficacy in the results. Starting with the 39% in the CAPRISA study leading on to 44% in the iPrEx study and going on to an astounding 75% in the Partners PrEP study – each one had an increased overall adherence rate and with this an increase in point efficacy, so the correlation appears to be a real phenomenon.

In addition, the sub-studies done in every trial showed that high adherers within a study had a better efficacy compared to the lower adherers. So we can quite confidently say there is a robust relationship between adherence and efficacy.

So how do we get people to adhere? Motivations play a great role. Partners PrEP which enrolled discordant couples had a great in-built motivation that one was protecting a loved one by taking the pill, which may be the reason we saw particularly high adherence for that population.

I think we also need to understand that not everybody in this world is a good pill-taker. There will be those who just cannot bring themselves to swallow pills on a daily basis. So PrEP may not be a very good idea for them. In that situation, maybe a rectal microbicide or a microbicide that’s part of a lubricant may work very well for that individual.

We need options. If we get to that stage in the future where other prevention technologies are available, like getting a shot in the arm that lasts three months, then we need that option on the table too. Like so many things in life, we may realise that people need different prevention options since they have different personalities.

MP: What are some of your final thoughts on what needs to happen to stem the HIV epidemic?

LGB: We need to have conversations on several different levels: ethical, scientific, public health, politics and priorities. Different countries and communities will be at different places. Some of the hard questions are : Who pays? How will we implement this prevention strategy? Is this strategy for the generalised epidemic or is it only for selected key populations? Who are the key populations? What are the social factors that make them vulnerable? Is this ethical? Does it make sound public health sense? What wont be afforded if we go this route? Who will benefit if we do?

Those are all very hard questions but they deserve to be asked and certainly require ongoing dialogue. This brings us back to the Mapping Pathway- we have been contributing to the dialogue through this project. We also need to do the modeling exercises and implement some feasibility type projects and then continue to raise more questions., It’s a wonderful thing that we are at a point where we can actually have these conversations. They are not hypothetical questions anymore. It is urgent to have these discussions in such a way that the next steps become clear and infections can be averted before too much more time is lost.

Linda-Gail Bekker is deputy director of the Desmond Tutu HIV Centre at the Institute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine, University of Cape Town. She also serves as the chief operating officer of the Desmond Tutu HIV Foundation, a Mapping Pathways partner organisation. 

Stay tuned for the Mapping Pathways monograph, coming in early 2013

[Content that is linked from other sources is for informational purposes and should not construe a Mapping Pathways position. Please look for us on Facebook here www.facebook.com/MappingPathways and you can follow us on Twitter @mappingpathways as well.]

Searching for comprehensive solutions: In conversation with Linda-Gail Bekker

Original content from our Mapping Pathways blog team

"The days of behaviourists, clinicians, scientists and legal policymakers being in separate rooms are over. We have to get into one room and work this problem out together."

In the fourth of this five-part series, Linda-Gail Bekker of the Desmond Tutu HIV Centre, a Mapping Pathways partner organisation, speaks about her involvement in the HPTN 067 study and about issues that make HIV the complicated problem it is. Read parts one, two and three

MP: What are some of the other issues that make HIV the complicated problem that it is?

LGB: For 30 years, many people thought HIV was a behavioural issue only - that using condoms, abstaining and being faithful would sort the whole problem out. On the other hand, the biomedically thinking people scrambled around trying to find something that worked, without a whole lot of success. Now the biomedical protagonists  have tools that work, such as PrEP and microbicides. The obvious mistake to be avoided at all cost would be to throw the behavioural science out and go entirely with the biomedical tools.  

This is a trap that medical people often fall into: (and I am one of them!!) they love to fix things with pills and find it easier to offer something tangible to a patient rather than wait for them to change their behaviour.  But pills and microbicides will not work unless they get to the people that need them and those people have the ability to take them. For example, if there’s a structural component in ones life that is a barrier, such as a violent partner, ones ability to reduce one’s risk may be compromised.

The days of behaviourists, clinicians, scientists and legal policymakers being in separate rooms are over. We have to get into one room and work this problem out together otherwise we may again end up with failure because we’re not coming up with comprehensive solutions. After 30 years thinking about a multi-sectoral approach seems the only way to go about it.

MP: Please tell us a little about the ADAPT study that you are involved in.

LGB: The HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) is funding the ADAPT study, also known as HPTN 067, in three sites. Cape Town, which I am PI of, is looking at women who have sex with men, while Bangkok and Harlem are enrolling  MSM. My site has enrolled 180 at-risk women who have sex with men and we are in the process of follow-ups with them.

The women are randomised to daily PrEP, intermittent PrEP and event-driven PrEP using Truvada. The pills are put into a ‘wise pill carrier’ and when it is opened to take a dose, a signal goes to the server.  Our staff call up the young women weekly to discuss what happened over the week. It is an intense study for the participants since they have to share intimate data with site staff on a regular basis but the idea is to look at feasibility and suitability to people of these various dosing modalities to see what works, what doesn’t work, and what people can actually adhere to. It has really needed committed participants and caring site staff with a great deal of trust between them!

The primary goal is to discover if people can use the pills the way they are meant to be used. There obviously are other issues like looking at side effects, safety and other data but the primary end point is feasibility and acceptability of a dosing strategy.

Linda-Gail Bekker is deputy director of the Desmond Tutu HIV Centre at the Institute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine, University of Cape Town. She also serves as the chief operating officer of the Desmond Tutu HIV Foundation, a Mapping Pathways partner organisation. 

Stay tuned to the blog as we bring you the final part of our conversation with Linda-Gail, where she speaks about her the importance of adherence, both in clinical trials and the real world, and the challenges and issues facing adolescents. 

Stay tuned for the Mapping Pathways monograph, coming in early 2013

[Content that is linked from other sources is for informational purposes and should not construe a Mapping Pathways position. Please look for us on Facebook here www.facebook.com/MappingPathways and you can follow us on Twitter @mappingpathways as well.]