Integrating Enhanced HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Into a Sexually Transmitted Infection Clinic in Lilongwe: Protocol for a Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) reduces HIV acquisition risk by >90% and is a critical lever to reduce HIV incidence. Identifying individuals most likely to benefit from PrEP and retaining them on PrEP throughout HIV risk is critical to realize PrEP's prevention potential. Individuals with sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are an obvious priority PrEP population, but there are no data from sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) confirming the effectiveness of integrating PrEP into STI clinics. Assisted partner notification may further enhance STI clinic-based PrEP programming by recruiting PrEP users from the pool of named sexual partners of individuals presenting with an incident STI. However, the acceptability, feasibility, and effectiveness of these integrated and enhanced strategies are unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the implementation outcomes of acceptability, feasibility, and effectiveness (regarding PrEP uptake and persistence) of integrating an enhanced PrEP implementation strategy into an STI clinic in Malawi. METHODS: The enhanced PrEP STI study is a prospective cohort study enrolling patients who are eligible for PrEP (aged ≥15 years) who are seeking STI services at a Lilongwe-based STI clinic. Data collection relies on a combination of in-depth interviews, patient and clinic staff surveys, and clinic record review. All enrolled PrEP users will be screened for acute HIV infection and receive quarterly testing for Neisseria gonorrhea, Chlamydia trachomatis, and syphilis. Participants will be asked to name recent sexual partners for assisted notification; returning partners will be screened for PrEP eligibility and, if interested, enrolled into the cohort of PrEP initiators. We will also enroll patients who are eligible for PrEP but choose not to initiate it, from the STI clinic. Patient participants will be followed for 6 months; we will assess self-reported PrEP use, PrEP refills, sexual behaviors, perceived HIV risk, and incident STIs. Clinic staff participants will be interviewed at baseline and at approximately 6 months and will complete surveys examining the perceived acceptability and feasibility of the integrated and enhanced PrEP strategy. RESULTS: Enrollment began in March 2022 and is projected to continue until February 2023, with patient participant follow-up through August 2023. The results of this study are expected to be reported in 2024. CONCLUSIONS: This study will generate important evidence regarding the potential integration of PrEP services into STI clinics in SSA and preliminary data regarding the effectiveness of an enhanced intervention that includes assisted partner notification as a strategy to identify potential PrEP users. Furthermore, this trial will provide some of the first insights into STI incidence among PrEP users recruited from an STI clinic in SSA-critical data to inform the use of etiologic STI testing where syndromic management is the current standard. These findings will help to design future PrEP implementation strategies in SSA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05307991; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05307991. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/37395.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.063 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.063 | 0.016 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".