Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2016 Jan 2;387(10013):53-60.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00056-2. Epub 2015 Sep 9.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis to prevent the acquisition of HIV-1 infection (PROUD): effectiveness results from the pilot phase of a pragmatic open-label randomised trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Pre-exposure prophylaxis to prevent the acquisition of HIV-1 infection (PROUD): effectiveness results from the pilot phase of a pragmatic open-label randomised trial

Sheena McCormack et al. Lancet. .

Abstract

Background: Randomised placebo-controlled trials have shown that daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with tenofovir-emtricitabine reduces the risk of HIV infection. However, this benefit could be counteracted by risk compensation in users of PrEP. We did the PROUD study to assess this effect.

Methods: PROUD is an open-label randomised trial done at 13 sexual health clinics in England. We enrolled HIV-negative gay and other men who have sex with men who had had anal intercourse without a condom in the previous 90 days. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive daily combined tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (245 mg) and emtricitabine (200 mg) either immediately or after a deferral period of 1 year. Randomisation was done via web-based access to a central computer-generated list with variable block sizes (stratified by clinical site). Follow-up was quarterly. The primary outcomes for the pilot phase were time to accrue 500 participants and retention; secondary outcomes included incident HIV infection during the deferral period, safety, adherence, and risk compensation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN94465371) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02065986).

Findings: We enrolled 544 participants (275 in the immediate group, 269 in the deferred group) between Nov 29, 2012, and April 30, 2014. Based on early evidence of effectiveness, the trial steering committee recommended on Oct 13, 2014, that all deferred participants be offered PrEP. Follow-up for HIV incidence was complete for 243 (94%) of 259 patient-years in the immediate group versus 222 (90%) of 245 patient-years in the deferred group. Three HIV infections occurred in the immediate group (1·2/100 person-years) versus 20 in the deferred group (9·0/100 person-years) despite 174 prescriptions of post-exposure prophylaxis in the deferred group (relative reduction 86%, 90% CI 64-96, p=0·0001; absolute difference 7·8/100 person-years, 90% CI 4·3-11·3). 13 men (90% CI 9-23) in a similar population would need access to 1 year of PrEP to avert one HIV infection. We recorded no serious adverse drug reactions; 28 adverse events, most commonly nausea, headache, and arthralgia, resulted in interruption of PrEp. We detected no difference in the occurrence of sexually transmitted infections, including rectal gonorrhoea and chlamydia, between groups, despite a suggestion of risk compensation among some PrEP recipients.

Interpretation: In this high incidence population, daily tenofovir-emtricitabine conferred even higher protection against HIV than in placebo-controlled trials, refuting concerns that effectiveness would be less in a real-world setting. There was no evidence of an increase in other sexually transmitted infections. Our findings strongly support the addition of PrEP to the standard of prevention for men who have sex with men at risk of HIV infection.

Funding: MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Public Health England, and Gilead Sciences.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trial profile *First to deferred and subsequently to immediate; considered in the deferred group for analyses but continued on pre-exposure prophylaxis. †19 pairs of partners were allocated to the same group (14 to immediate, five to deferred) including six pairs (all assigned to the immediate group) not enrolled concurrently. ‡One participant who was allocated to the deferred group was prescribed immediate pre-exposure prophylaxis in error; he was included in the deferred group for analyses but continued on pre-exposure prophylaxis. §Includes unable to contact, moved away, and non-attendance as no longer at risk. ¶HIV status ascertained if confirmed HIV-positive or HIV-negative test after 48 weeks or after Oct 13, 2014.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Incident HIV infections Left bound for each HIV case represents last non-reactive HIV test; right bound represents first reactive HIV test. The dotted line represents time when participants in the deferred group became eligible for pre-exposure prophylaxis under the original protocol. *Had a stored enrolment sample that tested positive for HIV RNA but was retained in the analysis.

Comment in

References

    1. Public Health England. HIV in the United Kingdom: 2014 Report. London, 2014.
    1. Nakagawa F, Miners A, Smith CJ. Projected lifetime healthcare costs associated with HIV infection. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0125018. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Phillips AN, Cambiano V, Nakagawa F. Increased HIV incidence in men who have sex with men despite high levels of ART-induced viral suppression: analysis of an extensively documented epidemic. PLoS One. 2013;8:e55312. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wilson DP. HIV treatment as prevention: natural experiments highlight limits of antiretroviral treatment as HIV prevention. PLoS Med. 2012;9:e1001231. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown AE, Nardone A, Delpech VC. WHO ‘Treatment as Prevention’ guidelines are unlikely to decrease HIV transmission in the UK unless undiagnosed HIV infections are reduced. AIDS. 2014;28:281–283. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

Associated data