Efficacy and Safety of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis to Control HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infection Among Men Who Have Sex With Men: Protocol for a Single-Arm Interventional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) against HIV infection is a new approach that involves the prophylactic use of the anti-HIV drug Truvada (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate [TDF] and emtricitabine [FTC]) by people not infected with HIV. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this investigator-initiated clinical study of PrEP was to evaluate the incidence of HIV and sexually transmitted infection (STI), safety and efficacy of PrEP in PrEP users, and their compliance with PrEP medication. The social, medical, and economic benefits of PrEP in Japan was assessed. METHODS: This single-center feasibility study of PrEP was conducted at the National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan, where a cohort of men who have sex with men without HIV was established in January 2017. This single-arm interventional study compared the efficacy and safety of PrEP in a single group of men who have sex with men who participated in PrEP cohort studies. For reference, the cohort study participants who did not participate in the PrEP study were included for comparison. Blood samples were collected for storage at baseline and clinic visits at 1, 3, and 6 months after starting PrEP and every 3 months thereafter. The participants were administered with 1 tablet of Truvada once daily as PrEP. They underwent blood and anal swab tests 1 and 3 months after starting PrEP and then HIV and STI infection assessments at 3-month intervals. Blood samples were centrifuged at the AIDS Clinical Center Laboratory. PrEP safety was evaluated by monitoring serum creatinine levels for symptoms of renal function disorders. The primary end point was the incidence of HIV in PrEP users (100 person-years). The secondary end points were the incidence of STI in PrEP users (100 person-years), incidence of adverse events caused by Truvada, frequency of high-risk sexual activity, and adherence to periodic visits and medication. RESULTS: The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the certified review board of the National Center for Global Health and Medicine (NCGM-C-003129-03) on April 20, 2020. Changes to the study plan were submitted for review by the certified review board and approved before implementation. Recruitment was completed on March 28, 2019, and the study was completed (last adult participant and last time point) on March 31, 2021. The data were analyzed, and the main results of the study have been published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicated that PrEP is a highly effective and feasible strategy against HIV infection in terms of prophylactic response, retention, and compliance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000031040; https://tinyurl.com/3msdkeb8 and Japan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCTs031180134; https://tinyurl.com/2p88mhyr. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/50919.
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 | 0.028 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.007 |
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".