No abstract

Background Variable adherence limits effectiveness of daily oral and intravaginal tenofovir-containing pre-exposure prophylaxis. Monthly vaginal antiretroviral rings are one approach to improve adherence and drug delivery. Methods MTN-013/IPM 026, a multi-site, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in 48 HIV-negative U.S. women, evaluated vaginal rings containing dapivirine (25 mg) and maraviroc (100 mg), dapivirine-only, maraviroc-only, and placebo used continuously for 28 days. Safety was assessed by adverse events. Drug concentrations were quantified in plasma, cervicovaginal fluid (CVF), and cervical tissue. Cervical biopsy explants were challenged with HIV ex vivo to evaluate pharmacodynamics. Results There was no difference in related genitourinary adverse events between treatment arms compared to placebo. Dapivirine and maraviroc concentrations rose higher initially before falling more rapidly with the combination ring compared to relatively stable concentrations with the single drug rings. Dapivirine concentrations in CVF were 1 and 5 log10 greater than cervical tissue and plasma for both rings. Maraviroc was consistently detected only in CVF. Dapivirine and maraviroc CVF and dapivirine tissue concentrations dropped rapidly after ring removal. Cervical tissue showed a significant inverse linear relationship between HIV replication and dapivirine levels. Conclusions In this first study of a combination microbicide vaginal ring, all four rings were safe and well tolerated. Tissue dapivirine concentrations were 1,000 times greater than plasma concentrations and single drug rings had more stable pharmacokinetics. Dapivirine, but not maraviroc, demonstrated concentration-dependent inhibition of HIV-1 infection in cervical tissue. Since maraviroc concentrations were consistently detectable only in CVF and not in plasma, improved drug release of maraviroc rings is needed.

BackgroundHigh-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) causes virtually all cervical cancers. Trans masculine (TM) people (those assigned female at birth who identify with a gender other than female) have low uptake of conventional cervical cancer screening. Self-collected hrHPV DNA testing has high levels of acceptability among cisgender (non-transgender) females and may support increased cervical cancer screening uptake in TM individuals.ObjectiveTo assess the test performance and acceptability of self-collected vaginal specimens in comparison to provider-collected cervical swabs for hrHPV DNA detection in TM individuals ages 21–64 years.MethodsBetween March 2015-September 2016, 150 TM participants with a cervix (mean age = 27.5 years; SD = 5.7) completed a one-time study visit comprised of a self-report survey, self-collected vaginal HPV DNA swab, clinician-administered cervical HPV swab, and brief interview on acceptability of clinical procedures. Participants were randomized to complete either self- or provider-collection first to minimize ordering effects. Self- and provider-collected samples were tested for 13 hrHPV DNA types using a DNA Hybridization Assay. The primary outcome variable was the concordance (kappa statistic) and performance (sensitivity, specificity) of self-collected vaginal HPV DNA specimens versus provider-collected cervical HPV swabs as the gold standard.ResultsOf the 131 participants completing both the self- and provider-collected HPV tests, 21 cases of hrHPV were detected by the provider cervical swab (gold standard; 16.0% hrHPV prevalence); 15 of these cases were accurately detected by the self-collected vaginal swab (71.4% concordance) (Kappa = 0.75, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.59, 0.92; p<0.001). Compared to the provider-collected cervical hrHPV DNA sample (gold standard), the self-collected vaginal hrHPV DNA test demonstrated a sensitivity of 71.4% (95% CI: 0.52, 0.91; p = 0.0495) and specificity of 98.2% (95% CI: 0.96, 1.00; p<0.0001). Over 90% of participants endorsed a preference for the self-collected vaginal swab over provider-collected cervical swab.ConclusionSelf-collected vaginal swabs are highly acceptable to TM as a means to test for hrHPV DNA. Test performance of this self-collection method for hrHPV detection in TM is consistent with previous studies in cisgender females. Self-collected vaginal swab testing for hrHPV DNA represents a reasonable and patient-centered strategy for primary cervical cancer screening in TM patients unwilling to undergo provider collection of specimens via speculum exam.

We compared the pathological diagnoses obtained by anal Papanicolaou (Pap) smear with those obtained by anal biopsy or by surgical excision for 153 men who have sex with men (MSM). Analysis of these paired specimens showed that anal Pap smears were an inaccurate predictor of high-grade anal dysplasia, regardless of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) serostatus. The presence of any abnormal anal cytological finding indicates a potential for high-grade dysplasia on histological examination of MSM.