The question of what motivates people to participate in research is particularly salient in the HIV field. While participation in HIV research was driven by survival in the 1980's and early 1990's, access to novel therapies became the primary motivator with the advent of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) in the late 1990s. In the HIV cure-related research context, the concept of altruism has remained insufficiently studied.
Abstract Background: HIV cure research involving cell and gene therapy has intensified in recent years. There is a growing need to identify standards, safeguards, and protections to ensure cell and gene therapy HIV cure research remains ethical and acceptable to as many stakeholders as possible as it advances on a global scale. Methods: To elicit ethical and practical considerations to guide cell and gene therapy HIV cure research, we implemented a qualitative, in-depth interview study with three key stakeholder groups in the United States: 1) biomedical HIV cure researchers, 2) bioethicists, and 3) community stakeholders. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. We applied conventional content analysis focused on inductive reasoning to analyze the rich qualitative data and derive key ethical and practical considerations related to cell and gene therapy towards an HIV cure. Results: We interviewed 13 biomedical researchers, 5 community members, and 1 bioethicist. Informants generated considerations related to: perceived benefits of cell and gene therapy towards an HIV cure, perceived risks, considerations necessary to ensure an acceptable benefit/risk balance, cell and gene therapy strategies considered unacceptable, additional ethical considerations, considerations for first-in-human cell and gene therapy HIV cure trials. Informants also proposed important safeguards to developing cell and gene therapy approaches towards an HIV cure, such as the importance of mitigating off-target effects, mitigating risks associated with long-term duration of cell and gene therapy interventions, and mitigating risks of immune overreactions. Conclusion: Rapidly evolving cell and gene therapy towards an HIV cure is accompanied by a host of ethical and practical challenges. To minimize risks to potential participants and facilitate the translation of scientific advancements from the bench to the clinic, cell and gene therapy HIV cure research must be thoughtfully developed and implemented. To protect the public trust in cell and gene therapy HIV cure research, ethical and practical considerations should be periodically revisited and updated as the science continues to evolve.
Background A unique window of opportunity currently exists to generate ethical and practical considerations presented by interventional HIV cure-related research at the end-of-life (EOL). Because participants would enroll in these studies for almost completely altruistic reasons, they are owed the highest ethical standards, safeguards, and protections. This qualitative empirical ethics study sought to identify ethical and practical considerations for interventional HIV cure-related research at the EOL. Methods and findings We conducted 20 in-depth interviews and three virtual focus groups (N = 36) with four key stakeholder groups in the United States: 1) bioethicists, 2) people with HIV, 3) HIV care providers, and 4) HIV cure researchers. This study produced six key themes to guide the ethical implementation of interventional HIV cure-related research at the EOL: 1) all stakeholder groups supported this research conditioned upon a clearly delineated respect for participant contribution and autonomy, participant understanding and comprehension of the risks associated with the specific intervention(s) to be tested, and broad community support for testing of the proposed intervention(s); 2) to ensure acceptable benefit-risk profiles, researchers should focus on limiting the risks of unintended effects and minimizing undue pain and suffering at the EOL; 3) only well-vetted interventions that are supported by solid pre-clinical data should be tested in the EOL translational research model; 4) the informed consent process must be robust and include process consent; 5) research protocols should be flexible and adopt a patient/participant centered approach to minimize burdens and ensure their overall comfort and safety; and 6) a participant’s next-of-kin/loved ones should be a major focus of EOL research but only if the participant consents to such involvement. Conclusions To our knowledge, this empirical ethics study generated the first ethical and practical considerations for interventional HIV cure-related research at the EOL. The ethical complexities of such research must be considered now. We must navigate this ethical conundrum so that we are good stewards of the participants’ extremely altruistic gifts by maximizing the impact and social value of this research. We hope that this study will serve as the foundation for future research and discussion on this topic.
Despite disproportionate incidence and prevalence of HIV among transgender individuals, cisgender women, and racial and ethnic minority groups, all remain underrepresented in HIV cure research. As HIV cure trials are scaled up, there is emerging research on ways to mitigate risks of HIV acquisition for sexual partners of analytical treatment interruption (ATI) trial participants. As such, it is imperative that HIV cure researchers consider the implications of implementing ATIs in populations that are disproportionately affected by HIV, but largely underrepresented in trials to date. In this qualitative study, we sought to derive triangulated perspectives on the social and ethical implications regarding ATIs and partner protection strategies during ATIs among under-represented populations. We conducted 21 in-depth interviews with 5 types of informants: bioethicists, community members [people living with HIV (PLWH) and their advocates], biomedical HIV cure researchers, sociobehavioral scientists, and HIV care providers. We analyzed the data using conventional content analysis and reduced the data to important considerations for implementing ATI trials in diverse communities and settings. Our study revealed the following key themes: (1) attention must be paid to gender and power dynamics in ATI trials; (2) ATI trials should be designed and implemented through the lenses of intersectionality and equity frameworks; (3) ATI trials may have both positive and negative effects on stigma for PLWH and their partners; and (4) partnership dynamics should be considered when designing ATI protocols. Our study generated actionable considerations that could be implemented in ATI trials to promote their acceptability to communities that have been underrepresented in HIV cure research to date. Research teams must invest in robust community and stakeholder engagement to define best practices. Paying attention to representation and equity will also promote better and more equitable implementation of HIV cure strategies once these become ready for rollout.
Abstract Background An increasing number of HIV cure trials involve combining multiple potentially curative interventions. Until now, considerations for designing and implementing complex combination HIV cure trials have not been thoroughly considered. Methods We used a purposive method to select key informants for our study. Informants included biomedical HIV cure researchers, regulators, policy makers, bioethicists, and community members. We used in-depth interviews to generate ethical and practical considerations to guide the design and implementation of combination HIV cure research. We analyzed the qualitative data using conventional content analysis focused on inductive reasoning. Results We interviewed 11 biomedical researchers, 4 community members, 2 regulators, 1 policy researcher, and 1 bioethicist. Informants generated considerations for designing and implementing combination interventions towards an HIV cure, focused on ethical aspects, as well as considerations to guide trial design, benefit/risk determinations, regulatory requirements, prioritization and sequencing and timing of interventions, among others. Informants also provided considerations related to combining specific HIV cure research modalities, such as broadly neutralizing antibodies (bNAbs), cell and gene modification products, latency-reversing agents and immune-based interventions. Finally, informants provided suggestions to ensure meaningful therapeutic improvements over standard antiretroviral therapy, overcome challenges of designing combination approaches, and engage communities around combination HIV cure research. Conclusion The increasing number of combination HIV cure trials brings with them a host of ethical and practical challenges. We hope our paper will inform meaningful stakeholder dialogue around the use of combinatorial HIV cure research approaches. To protect the public trust in HIV cure research, considerations should be periodically revisited and updated with key stakeholder input as the science continues to advance.
There are two concurrent and novel major research pathways toward strategies for HIV control: (1) long-acting antiretroviral therapy (ART) formulations and (2) research aimed at conferring sustained ART-free HIV remission, considered a step toward an HIV cure. The importance of perspectives from people living with HIV on the development of new modalities is high, but data are lacking. We administered an online survey in which respondents selected their likelihood of participation or nonparticipation in HIV cure/remission research based on potential risks and perceived benefits of these new modalities. We also tested the correlation between perceptions of potential risks and benefits with preferences of virologic control strategies and/or responses to scenario choices, while controlling for respondent characteristics. Of the 282 eligible respondents, 42% would be willing to switch from oral daily ART to long-acting ART injectables or implantables taken at 6-month intervals, and 24% to a hypothetical ART-free remission strategy. We found statistically significant gender differences in perceptions of risk and preferences of HIV control strategies, and possible psychosocial factors that could mediate willingness to switch to novel HIV treatment or remission options. Our study yielded data on possible desirable product characteristics for future HIV treatment and remission options. Findings also revealed differences in motivations and preferences across gender and other sociodemographic characteristics that may be actionable as part of research recruitment efforts. The diversity of participant perspectives reveals the need to provide a variety of therapeutic options to people living with HIV and to acknowledge their diverse experiential expertise when developing novel HIV therapies.
For over a decade, the binary concepts of 'sterilizing' versus 'functional' cure have provided an organizing framework for the field of HIV cure-related research. In this article, we examine how the expression 'functional cure' is employed within the field, published literature, and community understanding of HIV cure research. In our synthesis of the different meanings attributed to 'functional cure' within contemporary biomedical discourse, we argue that employing the 'functional cure' terminology poses a series of problems. The expression itself is contradictory and inconsistently used across a wide array of HIV cure research initiatives. Further, the meaning and acceptability of 'functional cure' within communities of people living with and affected by HIV is highly variable. After drawing lessons from other fields, such as cancer and infectious hepatitis cure research, we summarize our considerations and propose alternative language that may more aptly describe the scientific objectives in question. We call for closer attention to language used to describe HIV cure-related research, and for continued, significant, and strategic engagement to ensure acceptable and more precise terminology.
The Last Gift is an observational HIV cure-related research study conducted with people with HIV at the end of life (EOL) at the University of California San Diego. Participants agree to voluntarily donate blood and other biospecimens while living and their bodies for a rapid research autopsy postmortem to better understand HIV reservoir dynamics throughout the entire body. The Last Gift study was initiated in 2017. Since then, 30 volunteers were enrolled who are either (1) terminally ill with a concomitant condition and have a prognosis of 6 months or less or (2) chronically ill with multiple comorbidities and nearing the EOL. Multiple ethical and logistical challenges have been revealed during this time; here, we share our lessons learnt and ethical analysis. Issues relevant to healthcare research include surrogate informed consent, personal and professional boundaries, challenges posed conducting research in a pandemic, and clinician burnout and emotional support. Issues more specific to EOL and postmortem research include dual roles of clinical care and research teams, communication between research personnel and clinical teams, legally required versus rapid research autopsy, identification of next of kin/loved ones and issues of inclusion. Issues specific to the Last Gift include logistics of body donation and rapid research autopsy, and disposition of the body as a study benefit. We recommend EOL research teams to have clear provisions around surrogate informed consent, rotate personnel to maintain boundaries, limit direct contact with staff associated with clinical care and have a clear plan for legally required versus research autopsies, among other recommendations.
Abstract Background HIV cure research involving cell and gene therapy has intensified in recent years. There is a growing need to identify ethical standards and safeguards to ensure cell and gene therapy (CGT) HIV cure research remains valued and acceptable to as many stakeholders as possible as it advances on a global scale. Methods To elicit preliminary ethical and practical considerations to guide CGT HIV cure research, we implemented a qualitative, in-depth interview study with three key stakeholder groups in the United States: (1) biomedical HIV cure researchers, (2) bioethicists, and (3) community stakeholders. Interviews permitted evaluation of informants’ perspectives on how CGT HIV cure research should ethically occur, and were transcribed verbatim. We applied conventional content analysis focused on inductive reasoning to analyze the rich qualitative data and derive key ethical and practical considerations related to CGT towards an HIV cure. Results We interviewed 13 biomedical researchers, 5 community members, and 1 bioethicist. Informants generated considerations related to: perceived benefits of CGT towards an HIV cure, perceived risks, considerations necessary to ensure an acceptable benefit/risk balance, CGT strategies considered unacceptable, additional ethical considerations, and considerations for first-in-human CGT HIV cure trials. Informants also proposed important safeguards to developing CGT approaches towards an HIV cure, such as the importance of mitigating off-target effects, mitigating risks associated with long-term duration of CGT interventions, and mitigating risks of immune overreactions. Conclusion Our study identified preliminary considerations for CGT-based HIV cure across three key stakeholder groups. Respondents identified an ideal cure strategy as one which would durably control HIV infection, protect the individual from re-acquisition, and eliminate transmission to others. Known and unknown risks should be anticipated and perceived as learning opportunities to preserve and honor the altruism of participants. Preclinical studies should support these considerations and be transparently reviewed by regulatory experts and peers prior to first-in-human studies. To protect the public trust in CGT HIV cure research, ethical and practical considerations should be periodically revisited and updated as the science continues to evolve. Additional ethics studies are required to expand stakeholder participation to include traditionally marginalized groups and clinical care providers.
Long-acting injectable antiretroviral therapy (LAI-ART) is one of the latest advancements in HIV control with the potential to overcome oral ART barriers to adherence. The objective of this article is to anticipate and examine implementation considerations for LAI-ART using components of the PRISM model, a Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model for integrating research findings into practice. We conducted a scoping review from January to August 2020 of the growing literature on LAI-ART implementation and other fields using LAI therapies. Key considerations regarding LAI-ART were parsed from the searches and entered into the PRISM implementation science framework. The PRISM framework posed multiple questions for consideration in the development of an optimal implementation strategy for LAI-ART in the United States. These questions revealed the necessity for more data, including acceptability of LAI-ART among many different subgroups of people living with HIV (PLWH), cost effectiveness, patient satisfaction, and patient-reported outcomes, as well as more detailed information related to the external environment for optimal LAI-ART implementation. Ethical considerations of LAI-ART will also need to be considered. The anticipation of, and excitement for, LAI-ART represent the hope for a new direction for HIV treatment that reduces adherence barriers and improves prognoses for PLWH. We have a unique window of opportunity to anticipate implementation considerations for LAI-ART, so this new therapy can be used to its fullest potential. Outstanding questions remain, however, that need to be addressed to help achieve HIV suppression goals in diverse populations.
