RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: CARISEL is an implementation-effectiveness "hybrid" study examining the perspectives of people living with HIV-1 (patient study participants [PSPs]) on cabotegravir (CAB) plus rilpivirine (RPV) long-acting (LA) dosed every 2 months (Q2M) across 5 European countries. METHODS: PSPs completed questionnaires on acceptability (Acceptability of Intervention Measure), appropriateness (Intervention Appropriateness Measure), and feasibility (Feasibility of Intervention Measure) at their first (Month [M] 1), third (M4), and seventh (M12) injection visits. Semistructured qualitative interviews were also conducted. RESULTS: Overall, 437 PSPs were enrolled, of whom 430 received treatment. Median (interquartile range) age was 44 (37-51) years, 25.3% (n = 109/430) were female (sex at birth), and 21.9% (n = 94/430) were persons of color. Across time points, PSPs found CAB + RPV LA highly acceptable, appropriate, and feasible (mean scores ≥4.47/5). Qualitative data supported these observations. CONCLUSIONS: PSPs found CAB + RPV LA Q2M to be an acceptable, appropriate, and feasible treatment option.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Anti-VIH , Infecciones por VIH , Piridonas , Rilpivirina , Humanos , Rilpivirina/uso terapéutico , Rilpivirina/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Masculino , Adulto , Infecciones por VIH/tratamiento farmacológico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Europa (Continente) , Fármacos Anti-VIH/uso terapéutico , Fármacos Anti-VIH/administración & dosificación , Piridonas/uso terapéutico , Piridonas/administración & dosificación , VIH-1/efectos de los fármacos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , DicetopiperazinasRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Cabotegravir plus rilpivirine (CAB + RPV) is the first complete long-acting (LA) regimen recommended for maintaining HIV-1 virological suppression. Cabotegravir And Rilpivirine Implementation Study in European Locations (CARISEL) is an implementation-effectiveness study examining the implementation of CAB+RPV LA administered every 2 months (Q2M) in European HIV centres. We present staff study participant (SSP) perspectives on the administration of CAB+RPV LA over 12 months. METHODS: Eighteen clinics were randomized to one of two implementation support packages: standard arm (Arm-S) or enhanced arm (Arm-E). Arm-S included video injection training and provider/patient toolkits. Additionally, Arm-E included skilled wrap-around team meetings, face-to-face injection training and continuous quality improvement (CQI) calls. SSPs completed surveys on the acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of CAB+RPV LA as an intervention and its implementation into their clinics, as well as barriers and facilitators to implementation. All surveys were completed at Month (M)1 (baseline), M5 and M12; data collection was completed by February 2022. Qualitative data were obtained from semi-structured interviews at M1, M5 and M12. The primary objective was assessed via formal statistical comparisons between study arms of the Acceptability of Implementation Measure, Implementation Appropriateness Measure and Feasibility of Implementation Measure surveys (1-5 Likert scale ranging from 1 = "completely disagree" to 5 = "completely agree"). Equivalent measures anchored to CAB+RPV LA as a therapy were also assessed. RESULTS: Seventy SSPs completed surveys and interviews at M1, 68 at M5 and 62 at M12. Mean acceptability/appropriateness/feasibility scores were ≥3.8 (out of 5) at M12 for implementation- and intervention-based measures. An analysis of covariance showed no significant differences between study arms for these outcomes. Although barriers were noted, most SSPs were not overly concerned that these would impact implementation; concern about these anticipated barriers also decreased over time. At M12, 90.3% (n = 56/62) of SSPs held a positive opinion about CAB+RPV LA implementation. Qualitative interviews and CQI calls highlighted three top practices that supported implementation: implementation planning; education about CAB+RPV LA clinical efficacy; and education around administering injections and managing pain/discomfort after injections. CONCLUSIONS: CARISEL demonstrated that CAB+RPV LA dosed Q2M was successfully implemented across a range of European locations, with SSPs finding implementation highly acceptable, appropriate and feasible. GOV NUMBER: NCT04399551.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Anti-VIH , Infecciones por VIH , Piridonas , Rilpivirina , Humanos , Rilpivirina/uso terapéutico , Rilpivirina/administración & dosificación , Infecciones por VIH/tratamiento farmacológico , Europa (Continente) , Fármacos Anti-VIH/uso terapéutico , Fármacos Anti-VIH/administración & dosificación , Piridonas/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , DicetopiperazinasRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Cabotegravir and rilpivirine (CAB+RPV long-acting (LA)) is recommended as a treatment for HIV-1 allowing people living with HIV to receive 2 monthly injectable treatment, rather than daily pills. Providing injectable therapy in a system designed to provide and manage study participants on oral treatments poses logistical challenges namely how resources are used to accommodate patient preference within constrained health economies with capacity limitations. In this pragmatic multicentre study, we aim to understand the implementation of CAB-RPV-LA administration in two settings via mixed methods to explore perspectives of participants and the clinical team delivering CAB+RPV LA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Women, racially minoritised people and older people are chronically under-represented in HIV clinical trials so the ILANA trial has set recruitment caps to ensure recruitment of 50% women, 50% ethnically diverse people and 30% over 50 years of age to include a more representative study population. Using a mixed-methods approach, the primary objective is to identify and evaluate the critical implementation strategies for CAB+RPV LA in both hospital and community settings. Secondary objectives include evaluating feasibility and acceptability of CAB+RPV LA administration at UK clinics and community settings from the perspective of HIV care providers, nurses and representatives at community sites, evaluating barriers to implementation, the utility of implementation strategies and adherence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Health Research Authority Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 22/PR/0318). The dissemination strategy has been formulated with the SHARE Collaborative Community Advisory Board to maximise the impact of this work on clinical care and policy. This strategy draws on and leverages existing resources within the participating organisations, such as their academic infrastructure, professional relationships and community networks. The strategy will leverage the Public Engagement Team and press office to support dissemination of findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05294159.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Anti-VIH , Infecciones por VIH , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Masculino , Estudios Longitudinales , Infecciones por VIH/tratamiento farmacológico , Rilpivirina/uso terapéutico , Políticas , Reino Unido , Fármacos Anti-VIH/uso terapéutico , Estudios Multicéntricos como AsuntoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: A novel long-acting regimen (LAR) of cabotegravir and rilpivirine for HIV treatment requires dosing every 2 months instead of daily. We assessed what proportion of people living with HIV and physicians would be interested in trying and offering LAR respectively and why. METHODS: 688 people living with HIV on treatment, and 120 HIV physicians completed web-based surveys in Germany, Italy, the UK and France during 2019. Balanced description of a hypothetical LAR regarding efficacy, administration and possible side effects were provided. The hypothetical long-acting injections were assumed to be cost-neutral to current daily oral antiretrovirals. Interest of people living with HIV in trying ('very'/'highly') and physicians' willingness to offer ('definitely'/'probably') this LAR in different situations, with perceived benefits/concerns was measured. RESULTS: Of people living with HIV, 65.8% were interested in trying LAR. The majority (~80%-90%) of those with unmet needs felt LAR would help, including those with strong medical needs (malabsorption and interfering gastrointestinal conditions), suboptimal adherence, confidentiality/privacy concerns and emotional burden of daily dosing. Of physicians, percentage willing to offer LAR varied situationally: strong medical need (dysphagia, 93.3%; malabsorption, 91.6%; interfering gastrointestinal issues, 90.0%; central nervous system disorders, 87.5%); suboptimal adherence (84.2%); confidentiality/privacy concerns (hiding medications, 86.6%) and convenience/lifestyle (84.2%). People living with HIV liked LAR for not having to carry pills when travelling (56.3%); physicians liked the increased patient contact (54.2%). Furthermore, 50.0% of people living with HIV perceived LAR would minimise transmission risk and improve their sexual health. The most disliked attribute was scheduling appointments (37.2%) and resource constraints (57.5%) for people living with HIV and physicians, respectively. Physicians estimated 25.7% of their patients would actually switch. CONCLUSION: Providers and people living with HIV viewed the described LAR as addressing several unmet needs. Alternative treatment routes and especially LAR may improve adherence and quality of life.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Anti-VIH/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Anti-VIH/uso terapéutico , Infecciones por VIH/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones por VIH/psicología , Personal de Salud/psicología , Adulto , Esquema de Medicación , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , VIH-1/efectos de los fármacos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Piridonas/administración & dosificación , Piridonas/uso terapéutico , Calidad de Vida , Rilpivirina/administración & dosificación , Rilpivirina/uso terapéutico , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Carga ViralRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The daily oral dosing requirement for antiretroviral therapy (ART) may be challenging for some people living with HIV (PLWHIV) with comorbid conditions, confidentiality concerns or pill fatigue. We investigated suboptimal adherence from the perspective of PLWHIV and HIV physicians. METHODS: PLWHIV on ART (n = 688) and HIV physicians (n = 120) were surveyed during 2019 in France, Germany, Italy and the UK. Suboptimal adherence was a report the participant missed taking their dose as prescribed 'Sometimes'/'Often'/'Very often'. Physicians' interest in offering a hypothetical long-acting HIV regimen for suboptimally adherent patients was assessed. Descriptive and multivariable analyses were performed (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Of PLWHIV, 23.8% (164/688) reported suboptimal adherence vs. providers' estimated prevalence of 33.6% (SD = 28.8). PLWHIV-reported prevalence of specific suboptimal adherence behaviors were: mistimed dose [16.1% (111/688)]; missed a dose [15.7% (108/688)]; dosed under wrong conditions [e.g. food restrictions, 10.5% (72/688)] and overdosed [3.3% (23/688)]. Odds of suboptimal adherence were higher among those with vs. without a report of the following: dysphagia (AOR = 3.61, 95% CI = 2.28-5.74), stress/anxiety because of their daily dosing schedule (AOR = 3.09, 95% CI = 1.97-4.85), gastrointestinal side effects (AOR = 2.09, 95% CI = 1.39-3.15), neurocognitive/mental health conditions (AOR = 1.88, 95% CI = 1.30-2.72) or hiding their HIV medication (AOR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.04-2.19). Of providers, 84.2% indicated they Definitely/Probably will offer a hypothetical long-acting HIV regimen 'for patients who have suboptimal levels of adherence to daily oral therapy (50-90%) for non-medical reasons'. CONCLUSIONS: Dysphagia, stressful daily oral dosing schedule, gastrointestinal side effects, neurocognitive/mental health conditions and confidentiality concerns were associated with suboptimal adherence in our study. Adherence support and alternative regimens, such as long-acting antiretroviral therapies, could help address these challenges.