Clinical trial NCT06397690: Supporting Oral and Long-acting PrEP Decision Making Among Pregnant Women in Lilongwe, Malawi
Official title: UNCPM 22325 - Supporting Oral and Long-acting Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Decision Making Among Pregnant Women in Lilongwe, Malawi: a Feasibility Pilot Study
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Phase: NA
Conditions: HIV Prevention
Keywords: PrEP in pregnancy and breastfeeding
Lead sponsor: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Sponsor class: OTHER
Collaborators: name: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
First posted: 2024-05-03
Enrollment: 75
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: yes
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Primary purpose: PREVENTION

Brief summary: Purpose: The overall objective of this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of a shared decision-making (SDM) intervention to support personally appropriate decision making about Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use during pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Participants: The primary population to be recruited for this study is HIV-negative pregnant women. For qualitative data collection only, investigators will also recruit male partners of these participants, and PrEP counselors and health care workers. The rationale behind focusing on pregnant women is because of the elevated HIV risk faced by women in the perinatal period. Investigators will recruit 50 women to participate in the feasibility pilot study. A subset of these participants will participate in qualitative interviews. Up to 10 male partners and up to 15 study staff will be recruited to participate in qualitative in-depth interviews.

Procedures (methods): Investigators propose a pilot feasibility study of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for pregnant women considering PrEP. 50 women will be randomized to receive either the SDM intervention addressing daily oral PrEP, Long-acting injectable cabotegravir (CAB-LA), and alternative HIV prevention methods (condoms), or standard of care counselling addressing the same prevention methods. In both studies, investigators will evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention and associated study procedures. Women expressing interest in either PrEP method will be referred to government PrEP services.

Detailed description: Study design:

Investigators propose a pilot feasibility study of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for pregnant women considering PrEP. 50 women will be randomized to receive either the SDM intervention addressing daily oral PrEP, CAB-LA, and alternative HIV prevention methods (condoms), or standard of care counselling addressing the same prevention methods. In both studies, investigators will evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention and associated study procedures. Women expressing interest in either PrEP method will be referred to government PrEP services.

Study intervention:

The study intervention, My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice), is a counselor-delivered shared decision-making approach for pregnant women considering PrEP. The intervention counseling will be delivered by trained study staff with a background in psychosocial counseling. The intervention consists of counseling facilitated by a SDM tool. The woman's partner may be present depending on her preference. It begins with a review of HIV risk in pregnancy/breastfeeding including discussion of population-specific risk factors which may apply to the participant. After understanding participant HIV risk and desire for HIV protection, the counselor presents HIV prevention options including CAB-LA, daily oral PrEP, and internal and external condoms (discussing attributes and potential advantages and disadvantages of each method). This is followed by a values clarification exercise to identify which features of the competing options matter most to the participant (product attributes and personal and interpersonal implications of each method). The counselor reviews information about these valued features for each offered method. This information and checks to understand and address any unmet participant decision support needs serve as the basis for structured deliberation to collaboratively identify participant preferred method(s).

Standard of care (control arm):

Participants randomized to the control arm will PrEP counseling as based on the current standard of care (SOC) . The SOC counseling will be delivered by a trained study staff member. The SOC counselor PrEP counseling according to national guidelines. Per current guidelines, the SOC counseling may include the following elements: An HIV risk assessment according to PrEP eligibility criteria; discussion of a combination prevention approach (PrEP and condoms) and risk reduction strategies. The women will receive comprehensive education on both the advantages and limitations of PrEP, including guidance on managing potential side effects. Subsequently, the counselor will assess the woman's eligibility, willingness, and readiness to start using PrEP. Women choosing oral PrEP during the SOC counseling session will be referred to government services to initiate PrEP. Participants choosing CAB-LA will initiate CAB-LA through the ongoing national pilot program.

Participants will be randomly assigned 1:1 to one of two study arms (intervention or comparison) using permuted block randomization. Participants will be blinded to their assignment, but study staff will not.

Participants choosing oral PrEP during the counselling session in either intervention or comparison arm will receive an assisted referral to government PrEP services at the study site to initiate their selected PrEP method per national guidelines. Participants choosing CAB-LA will initiate CAB-LA through the ongoing national pilot program. No study drug will be administered. Initiation of either PrEP method (i.e., receipt of prescription or injection) will be confirmed through clinic or pharmacy records, as well as information on reasons for non-initiation if applicable.

Investigators plan study follow-up visits at month 1 and month 2 following enrollment. Interviewer-administered questionnaires will be completed at the month 1 follow-up and the final follow-up visit (month 2). Questionnaires will assess study outcomes and associated social and behavioural measures to contextualize understanding of primary study outcomes. A subset of participants will complete in-depth qualitative interviews at month 1. Interviews will provide additional understanding of participant experiences with the intervention and experience using PrEP (if applicable).

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

The criteria for pregnant women participants is as follows:

Inclusion criteria

* Age 18 or older
* Documented pregnancy by urine pregnancy test or physical exam
* Documented negative HIV status within the past three months
* Identified factor(s) for elevated risk for HIV acquisition per PrEP national eligibility guidelines
* Willingness to remain in the study site's catchment area over the course of study follow-up and to comply with visit schedule
* Ability and willingness to provide informed consent

Investigators will also conduct interviews with male partners and study staff to assess exploratory qualitative outcomes. All study staff will be eligible to participate in an interview. Male partners will be eligible to participate if they meet the following criteria:

* Referred by a study participant as her romantic partner
* Age 18 or older
* Able and willing to provide informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

* Positive HIV test at time of screening
* No identified HIV risk factors per national PrEP guidelines
* Risk for intimate partner violence or social harms as a result of participation, in the judgement of the study personnel

Primary outcomes:
measure: Acceptability of Intervention Measure Score
timeFrame: enrollment, final follow up visit (Month 2)
measure: Intervention Appropriateness Measure Score
timeFrame: enrollment, final follow up visit (Month 2)
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Mean Number of Women Screened Weekly
timeFrame: At screening
measure: Proportion of Screened Eligible Women Enrolling in the study
timeFrame: At the time of enrollment
measure: Proportion of Enrolled Participants Returning for Follow-Up Visits
timeFrame: 1-month follow-up, 2-month follow-up
measure: Number of Days Taken to Achieve Enrollment Targets from the Date of Enrollment Initiation
timeFrame: At the time of enrollment
measure: Number of Days Taken to Achieve Retention Targets from the Date of the First Scheduled Follow-up Visit
timeFrame: At the time of enrollment, 2-month follow-up
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Lilongwe
country: Malawi
facility: Bwaila Hospital
state: Central Region
Study officials:
affiliation: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
name: Lauren Hill, PhD,MSPH
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References: