Mapping Pathways is a multi-national project to develop and nurture a research-driven, community-led global understanding of the emerging evidence base around the adoption of antiretroviral-based prevention strategies to end the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The evidence base is more than results from clinical trials - it must include stakeholder and community perspectives as well.

Showing posts with label at-risk groups. Show all posts
Showing posts with label at-risk groups. Show all posts

20 July 2012

WHO issues first guidance on use of antiretrovirals by HIV-negative people at high risk to prevent infection


World Health Organization20 JULY 2012 | GENEVA / WASHINGTON DC - WHO has issued its first guidance to countries that are considering offering HIV medications, known as antiretrovirals (ARVs), to protect people who do not have the virus but who are at high risk of HIV infection.



Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP):

The guidance is based on clinical trials indicating that a daily dose of oral antiretroviral medication, known as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), taken by HIV-negative people to reduce the risk of infection, is both safe for people to use and effective in preventing HIV. The iPrEX study shows that use of PrEP can reduce HIV infection by around 40% among men who have sex with men – and up to 73% among those who took the medicine regularly. The Partners PrEP study found 75% protection among serodiscordant couples (couples in which one person is HIV positive) in Kenya and Uganda.

The range of results in these studies highlight the potential benefits of PrEP, but also the importance of combining it with consistent use of condoms, as well as frequent HIV testing, counselling, and treatment of sexually transmitted infections.

They also emphasize the importance of taking medicines every day. Many people who are at high risk for HIV may not easily be able to incorporate the diligent treatment regimen required, so the next challenge is to ascertain how best to deliver PrEP to those who would benefit from it in ‘real life’ settings in order to achieve the necessary adherence and maximum public health gains.


PrEP projects in countries:

To better understand how PrEP can best contribute to a combination HIV prevention programme, WHO is encouraging countries wishing to introduce PrEP to first establish small projects to help public health workers to better understand and realize its potential benefits. In these projects, ARVs would be given to people at high risk of HIV infection. These could include uninfected men or transgender women who have sex with men who have a high risk of being HIV-positive. The aim is to identify which groups will benefit most from PrEP, and ascertain the best ways to deliver the services to them.

WHO will evaluate the outcome of these projects, together with the evolving scientific evidence. The results will help determine the best way to integrate PrEP guidance in future consolidated WHO guidelines on the use of antiretrovirals for preventing and treating HIV infection, which are expected in the summer of 2013.


Read the rest.



[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.]

11 July 2012

HIV and the Law

via the Global Commission on HIV and the Law


The end of the global AIDS epidemic is within our reach. This will only be possible if science and action are accompanied by a tangible commitment to respecting human dignity and ending injustice.

Law prohibits or permits specific behaviours, and in so doing, it shapes politics, economics and society. The law can be a human good that makes a material diff erence in people’s lives. It is therefore not surprising that law has the power to bridge the gap between vulnerability and resilience to HIV.

We came together as a group of individuals from diverse backgrounds, experiences and continents to examine the role of the law in eff ective HIV responses. What we share is our abiding commitment to public health and social justice. We have listened with humility to hundreds of accounts describing the eff ects of law on HIV. In many instances, we have been overwhelmed by how archaic, insensitive laws are violating human rights, challenging rational public health responses and eroding social fabric. At other times, we have been moved by those who demonstrate courage and conviction to protect those most vulnerable in
our societies.

Many would say that the law can be complex and challenging and is best left alone. Our experience during this Commission has shown us a very different perspective. We have been encouraged by how frank and constructive dialogue on controversial issues can sometimes quickly lead to progressive law reform, the eff ective defence of legislation or better enforcement of existing laws. Even in environments where formal legal change is a slow and arduous process, we have witnessed countries taking action to strengthen access to justice and challenge stigma and discrimination.

Click here for the full report.


[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.]

23 March 2012

Protecting the Future: In conversation with Dr. Melissa Wallace

Original content from the Mapping Pathways blog team



Dr. Melissa Wallace is the Adolescent Project Leader at the Desmond Tutu HIV Foundation (DTHF) in South Africa. She is trained as a health psychologist and has been working in the field of HIV.

MP: How did you get involved in the field of adolescents and HIV prevention and treatment?

MW:My PhD in the U.K was on the topic of cancer and the physical changes that result from cancer treatment – hair loss, amputation and scarring – and how people come to terms with these changes.  On reading the literature, I realized there was very little that had been done with adolescents who were dealing with these changes, which was strange considering that adolescence is a period in life when people are most aware of their appearance and their bodies. So it was that decision to focus on adolescents during my PhD that led me on this road. After returning to South Africa, I realized that the biggest health problem facing us was HIV, and adolescents as a group were contributing a lot to the epidemic. This made me keen to work in this field.

MP: What is the reason behind DTHF’s focus on adolescents?

MW:In South Africa, we have a generalized HIVepidemic. However, there are some sub groups more at risk for HIV acquisition and adolescents are one of the groups most at risk.This is something that the DTHF has recognized for some time. If you look at graphs of HIV incidence for adolescent boys and girls – they reach the age of about 14-15 and suddenly the graphs become steep as incidence rises, and this is particularly the case for adolescent girls.  The fact is that they are often in relationships where they have very little control. There is also high gender inequality, poverty and less access to health services. All these factors play a role in putting adolescents at a high risk.

Also adolescence, in general, is a difficult time in one’s life. It’s a time where people are trying to find their identity, are curious, and have a higher chance of indulging in risky behavior. This may be sexually risky behavior or willingness to indulge in substance abuse. This is an age when kids break away from their parents more and peers become more of an influence. This makes them more likely to take risks in general.

In South Africa, there are also a lot of contextual factors that drive this epidemic for adolescents, particularly girls. For instance, there’s a lot of trans generational sex: girls having sex with much older male partners who are much more likely to be exposed to HIV already. There’s also a lot of transactional sex – girls and boys who will have sex for goods or money. Meaning that even though these youngsters may not be sex workers, there is a financial incentive for them to have sex. This is exacerbated by poverty.

MP: What are your current projects on the topic of adolescents and HIV prevention?

MW:We are working on a number of projects, including a follow-up study to a big three-year study that looked at building capacity for conducting vaccine trials among adolescents in South Africa. We recognized that there might be several biomedical prevention interventions at varying stages of development that could be licensed for use and unless we run trials with adolescents and build capacity, they wouldn’t be licensed for use with them. We also recognized that any prevention interventions targeting adolescents in particular would be best implemented prior to sexual debut. 

We developed six sites around South Africa and implemented adolescent friendly sexual health services at these sites. We also thought in detail about ethical and legal issues involved in conducting trials with adolescents, such as whether they could be recruited and whether parents would allow them to take part in this study. We did this by running a ‘mock’ HIV vaccine trial, using the (already licensed) HPV vaccine as our product. This gave us the opportunity to explore a number of key feasibility, ethico-legal and socio-behavioural questions.

Another study we’re hoping to start in the next couple of months is the FACTS 002 trial – which is an offshoot to the FACTS 001 trial (FACTS 001 is looking at the efficacy of tenofovir gel in adult women). FACTS 002 will be different in that it will address the safety and acceptability of tenofovir gel in girls who are a bit younger; participants’ age would range from 16-17 years old. The study will also address issues of adherence to the gel and how adolescents would feel about using it.

Another exciting project in its early stages is an MP3 project (methods of prevention) awarded to us by the NIH (National Institutes of Health). This project looks at feasibility and acceptability of a number of prevention methods that may become available in the future to adolescents. With all the progress with ARV based prevention methods, we envisage there may be a whole range of options available to people – and adolescents - to protect themselves from HIV. We’ll be running individual pilot studies on PrEP, microbicides and medical male circumcision and looking at issues around acceptability and feasibility and adherence. Finally, we will conduct a study in which we introduce a range of prevention options to adolescents and find out why and how they would make decisions about preferred prevention strategies, and what factors are important to them in making these decisions. This is a project we are really excited about since there’s not much that’s been done in this area with this age group.

FACTS 001 and the MP3 project will both take place at our brand new Youth Centre in the township of Masiphumelele. The Youth Centre itself has adopted a philosophy that we are hoping will contribute to a comprehensive prevention strategy for adolescents.  The Centre provides recreation services, education services and a reproductive health clinic together under one roof, for young people between the ages of 12 and 22. Our goal is to provide a safe, non-judgemental environment where young people can develop skills, learn and have fun, and enjoy a supportive environment where they are equipped to make the healthy choice in all aspects of their lives, including those issues related to HIV.

MP: What is the hardest part of your job?

MW:Sometimes the enormity of the problem feels overwhelming.  HIV is such a vast problem in South Africa and some of the structural factors – gender, equality, stigma and poverty make it that much harder to overcome. Sometimes, no matter what one does, the socio-economic circumstances are hard to get around. But I feel that we are at least doing something positive and impactful. There’s also a constant need to find funding to continue what we do and it is sometimes a challenge to be chasing that all the time to try and continue the work that we’re doing.

MP: Why does this work matter? Why does it excite you? 

MW: This work matters because, as a group,adolescents in South Africa are the most at risk for HIV, and we have a big opportunity to change the course of this epidemic if we target this group. Creating an impact prior to sexual debut will have the biggest positive impact on fighting this epidemic in the long term. 

This is a group that has been overlooked in healthcare a lot, partly since people see adolescents as harder to work with, so while there is established pediatric and adult care, adolescents are not afforded the same specialized care, something which is badly needed. There are also a number of other perceived challenges that come with working with this group. For instance, there are legal issues around conducting research and providing services to young people, as well as additional challenges like confidentiality and parental consent. To help deal with these issues, we have drafted a set of guidelines: Who gets the results from an HIV prevention study? Where does our responsibility lie: if we hear of something disturbing, do we notify the parents or higher authorities? These are the kinds of questions the guidelines seek to cover.

And finally and most importantly, at the risk of sounding cheesy, taking care of these adolescents is like taking care of the future of our country. Adolescents will grow up to be the adultsin our society, so whatever we can do now to protect their future is important.Particularly within the South African context, considering the poor socio-economic circumstances, these kids may feel that they don’t have a future worth staying HIV negative for–but it is our job to convince them otherwise andto make them feel excited and positive about their lives. This may be the key in helping them want to protect their HIV-negative status.


[Content that is linked from other sources is for informational purposes and should not construe a Mapping Pathways position.]

30 January 2012

Misconceptions surrounding HIV problematic in India

via The Times of India

Twenty-five years after the first case of HIV/AIDS was reported in the country, experts say the main target in the fight against the disease is misconceptions. After releasing the 13th Behaviour Surveillance Survey Round XIII for 2011, experts in the field said that awareness among the public had gone up but awareness without misconception was low.

Many believe that healthy-looking people have a good immune system and may not test positive for HIV/AIDS. Doctors have been trying to tell people that antiretroviral drugs - the medicines of choice for HIV/AIDS - will only keep the viral load low, but many assume they are safe after taking them. "We require schemes to target misconceptions. Only awareness without misconceptions will strengthen the fight against HIV," said AIDS Prevention And Control (APAC) project director Dr Bimal Charles.
Dr Charles said that in the surveys, people had said cleaning the vagina with vinegar or having sex with monkeys would keep out the infection.

The annual survey report, by APAC project along with Tamil Nadu State AIDS Control Society (TANSACS) and USAID, has been prepared since 1996. The survey is conducted among high-risk groups like female sex workers, gays and injecting drug users and bridge population groups such as truckers and migrant workers.

With a sample size of 5,000, the field work was done in November and December 2011 across 15 towns in Tamil Nadu. The results showed a significant improvement in the behaviour among targeted groups where NGOs were working.

Read the rest.


[Content that is linked from other sources is for informational purposes and should not construe a Mapping Pathways position.]

13 January 2012

Migrant population bears highest burden of HIV in India

via The Times of India, by Kounteya Sinha

Migration is fuelling India's HIV epidemic. National AIDS Control Organisation's latest figures show that besides high risk populations like sex workers, the highest burden of HIV is among migrants - 3.6%, which is 10 times the HIV prevalence among the general population.

With migration rates increasing, the prevalence will only get worse. According to the 2001 census, 30.1% of the population was considered to have migrated (314 million) - a considerable increase from 27.4% in 1991. NACO has, therefore, identified 108 railway stations - which are both source and destination of migrants travelling in search of work. These are now the focus of the country's anti-HIV fight.

Red Ribbon Express (RRE), which chugs out of Delhi on Thursday, will stop at most of these 108 identified stations to test migrants for HIV besides carrying out counselling and spreading anti-HIV messages. During it's year-long journey, RRE will traverse through 23 states, cover 30,000 km and stop at 162 stations.

Speaking to TOI, a NACO official said, "Migrants are one of the major focus areas this time with the RRE. Last year, RRE stopped at 152 stations and reached out to 8 million people directly. This time, around 30-40 stops will be to mainly address migrants."

NACO has identified 122 districts with high out-migration across 11 states which are on priority for starting up community level interventions. Another 75 important transit locations have been identified across these 122 districts from where these migrants usually board long distance trains/buses to reach their destinations.

Studies on the relationship between migration and HIV conducted by NACO in three popular migration corridors - Ganjam-Surat, Darbhanga-Delhi and Azamgarh-Mumbai - threw up shocking findings. It showed that two to four times more number of informal workers had non-regular partners or visited sex workers with only 25% using condoms. Around 5% male migrants and 13% female migrants reported sexually transmitted infections, nearly double the national average.

Read the rest.


[Content that is linked from other sources is for informational purposes and should not construe a Mapping Pathways position.]

13 October 2011

Bureaucracy in Nepal Leads to HIV Deaths

via World Policy Blog, by Kyle Knight

Bureaucratic deadlock is starting to kill people in Nepal. The country’s NGO sector working with populations deemed high-risk for contracting HIV-AIDS are in desperate need of $10 million of donor funds currently held by the cash-strapped government. While stories of stagnant bureaucracy in Nepal’s fledgling democratic government are not new, the consequences this time will put those increasingly dependent on NGO support at great risk. The failures of Nepal’s ineffective—even Kafkaesque—bureaucracy have obstructed even the most basic services, leaving NGOs to care for the country’s population.

Working with the most at-risk groups in the country such as intravenous drug users (IDUs), men who have sex with men (MSMs), and Nepal’s sizable transgender (TG) population, these organizations are unable to help treat or prevent HIV from spreading, because of the government’s embarrassing financial disorganization. NGOs working with IDUs have already reported preventable deaths linked to the funding gap, and organizations working with MSMs and TGs have not been able to hand out condoms for nearly three months. “It’s not that we don’t know how to treat people, or that we don’t have the capacity—it’s that we don’t have the money, ” explains an activist working for an IDU NGO. “Basic infections are going un-treated. Staff are looking for jobs elsewhere. These are unnecessary deaths.”

This is nothing new for donor-dependent Nepal. Sadly, the country is used to funding crises, especially in its HIV-AIDS programs. A recent impending shortage of pediatric ARV (anti-retro viral) was averted, thanks to the intervention of the United Nations.

The UN action has been a lifeline for the medical community and Nepali children living with HIV-AIDS. But it is far from enough. The HIV prevalence rate in Nepal is believed to be below 1 percent of the adult population, but infection rates vary considerably, and are substantially higher in most at-risk populations. In 2009, the government announced that the prevalence rates were decreasing across the country. The blocked $10 million will surely and unnecessarily boost the number of people infected by the virus and erase any gains made in recent years. While the impassive government receives warnings from international organizations, the risk of a new wave of infection is reaching a critical point.

Read the rest.


[Content that is linked from other sources is for informational purposes and should not construe a Mapping Pathways position.]

Gates Foundation’s AIDS Program in India Has Made Uneven Progress Over 8 Years

via The New York Times, by Donald G. McNeil, Jr.

A large and costly AIDS prevention program that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation pioneered in India eight years ago has had mixed results, according to a preliminary analysis published on Monday in The Lancet.
 
The foundation spent $258 million on the program from 2003 to 2008. It has since put in $80 million more, but is shifting responsibility to the Indian government.

The program, called Avahan, focuses on high-risk groups, like drug addicts, gay and bisexual men, and prostitutes and their clients, including truckers. It pays for education campaigns, safe-sex counseling, syringes, condoms and treatment for other venereal diseases. (Above, a sex worker at a prevention meeting.)

When the program began, it was assumed that India, with its huge population and government officials reluctant to discuss the problem, would quickly surpass South Africa as the country with the most AIDS cases. A 2007 household survey allayed those fears; the epidemic had stayed largely within the risk groups. India is now thought to be in third place, behind Nigeria.

Read the rest.


[Content that is linked from other sources is for informational purposes and should not construe a Mapping Pathways position.]

10 August 2011

PrEP acceptable to gay men and few report that it would change their risk behaviour

via aidsmap, by Michael Carter.

Approximately 50% of gay men said they were likely to use pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), but few reported that it would lead to a change in their risk behaviour, according to data presented to the International AIDS Society conference in Rome.

Nevertheless, the investigators were concerned that even minor increases in rates of unprotected anal sex could offset the benefits of pre-exposure prophylaxis.

The IPrEX study showed that PrEP significantly reduced the risk of infection with HIV for gay and bisexual men. Overall, men who took PrEP had their risk of HIV reduced by 44%. If adherence was high, the risk was reduced by 73%.

“PrEP offers much promise as the first biomedical intervention to have success in at-risk men who have sex with men,” comment the researchers.

They therefore undertook further analysis to see how likely the men who participated in the study were to use PrEP and if its availability would change their HIV risk behaviour.

They undertook a survey in December 2010, immediately following the release of the IPrEX results, using Facebook and Black Gay Chat to recruit participants. A total of 1155 gay and other men who have sex with men were recruited to the study.

Participants completed a questionnaire about their knowledge and willingness to use PrEP; perceptions of the risk of HIV infection from unprotected anal sex with or without PrEP; perceptions of sexual pleasure; and perception of likelihood to experience sexual pleasure with or without a condom and with or without PrEP.

The men had an average age of 33 years, 75% were white, and 51% reported unprotected anal sex at least once in the last twelve months.

Only a third of men had heard of PrEP before the release of the study results. Just under half of individuals reported that they were “very” or “extremely” likely to use PrEP.

Unprotected anal sex without a condom was widely considered to involve a high risk of HIV.

The availability of PrEP did not alter the perception of the risk associated with HIV in the majority of men, regardless of whether they were the insertive (75%) or receptive (60%) partner in anal sex.

Three-quarters of men stated that the 44% efficacy of PrEP in the IPrEX study would not affect their use of condoms. However, 7% reported that they would use condoms less frequently.

Read the rest here.

[Content that is linked from other sources is for informational purposes and should not construe a Mapping Pathways position.]

20 June 2011

Understanding the barriers to PrEP uptake


While formulating PrEP strategies, it is imperative that we, the HIV/AIDS prevention community, take into account the target community's concerns. By understanding the possible barriers and coming up with solutions, we can help ensure maximum possible effectiveness.

As per the findings of a study conducted in Peru and published in the International Journal of STD and AIDS, significant barriers among at-risk groups include concerns about cost, efficacy, and side-effects. The study was conducted by a team of researchers from UCLA and Lima, Peru; it included female sex workers, male-to-female transgendered individuals, and MSM.

To know more, check out aidsmap's round-up of the study here and EurekAlert!'s detailed article here.

On a related note, the Mapping Pathways project is also in the process of trying to gather perspectives on these questions from folks in our current focus areas – the US, South Africa, and India. If you’re interested in new ways to prevent transmission of HIV – and want to help shape our project goals and deliverables – we encourage you to take a few minutes and fill in our survey.

Your efforts will be greatly appreciated!


[Content that is linked from other sources is for informational purposes and should not construe a Mapping Pathways position.]