search
Back to results

Reaching 90% HIV Suppression: The Role of POC Viral Load Monitoring in Nigeria (POC)

Primary Purpose

HIV/AIDS

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Nigeria
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Point-of-care viral load monitoring test
Sponsored by
Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional supportive care trial for HIV/AIDS focused on measuring Point-of-care, Viral load monitoring, Nigeria

Eligibility Criteria

undefined - undefined (Child, Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

-All HIV-infected patients newly initiating ART

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previous ARV experience
  • Pregnant

Sites / Locations

  • Jos University Teaching Hospital
  • Comprehensive Health Care Centre, Zamko

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

No Intervention

Experimental

Arm Label

Standard of Care (SOC)

Point-of-care (POC)

Arm Description

Patients in this arm will have their viral load monitored using the standard of care method, using the Roche Cobas TaqMan HIV-1® v2 (Roche) assay.

Patients in this arm will have their follow-up viral loads (after baseline) monitored using a Point-of-care viral load monitoring test, the Cepheid Xpert HIV-1 Viral Load assay.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Proportion of patients with VL<1000 copies/mL at month 12 post-initiation of ART (range 11-15 months) in SOC VL versus POC VL
Proportion of patients that have undetectable viral load at the end of observation (month 12) will be compared by treatment arm

Secondary Outcome Measures

Difference in ART adherence patterns in patients in the SOC versus POC VL arms
Average percent adherence will be computed using patient refill data that are stored electronically. The average will be calculated as number of days supplied over total days in the given time interval, adjusting for amount of medication that should remain since last refill, computed based on amount supplied during the previous visit minus the number of days since the last visit.
Difference in loss to follow-up rates by 12 months post-initiation of ART between patients monitored with SOC versus POC VL arms
LTFU at month 12 is defined as not having made any refill pick-ups or clinical visits since 9-month post-initiation of ART.
Impact of trial site on differences in virologic suppression rates within patients receiving SOC VL monitoring
Comparison of data from two different trial sites
Difference in time from ART initiation to the confirmation of virologic failure in SOC versus POC VL monitoring arms
Subset analysis in those that experienced virologic failure (confirmed)
Difference in time from ART initiation to switch to 2L treatment in patients in VF in SOC versus POC VL monitoring arms
Subset analysis in those that experienced virologic failure (confirmed)
Difference in time from specimen collection to availability of VL results in patient charts in SOC versus POC VL monitoring arms
Comparison of time from specimen collection to the time the result is entered into the patient chart by treatment arm
Difference in time from specimen collection to delivery of VL results to patient in SOC versus POC VL monitoring arms
Comparison of time from specimen collection to the time the result is verbally conveyed to the patient by their clinician by treatment arm
Difference in time from lab confirmation of first unsuppressed VL to adherence counseling provided and switch to 2L in SOC versus POC VL monitoring arms
Subset analysis in those that experienced virologic failure (confirmed)
Difference in HIV DRM patterns in patients failing 1L ART in the SOC versus POC VL monitoring arm
Subset analysis in those that experienced virologic failure (confirmed)
Health care worker (HCW) satisfaction level with POC versus SOC VL monitoring
Health care workers will complete a standardized survey querying about their satisfaction with the POC assay. The survey uses a scale measuring agreement level. The scale ranges from 0 to 5 where 0=not applicable, 1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree
POC VL arm patient satisfaction with POC vs SOC VL testing
POC VL arm patients will be queried using a standardized survey about their satisfaction with the POC VL assay. The survey uses a scale measuring agreement level. The scale ranges from 0 to 5 where 0=not applicable, 1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree.

Full Information

First Posted
May 11, 2018
Last Updated
March 30, 2021
Sponsor
Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)
Collaborators
Jos University Teaching Hospital, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03533868
Brief Title
Reaching 90% HIV Suppression: The Role of POC Viral Load Monitoring in Nigeria
Acronym
POC
Official Title
Reaching 90% Target of HIV Viral Suppression: The Role of Point-of-Care Viral Load Monitoring in Resource-Constrained Settings in Nigeria
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
March 2021
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
April 9, 2018 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
February 28, 2021 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
February 28, 2021 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)
Collaborators
Jos University Teaching Hospital, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
The UNAIDS 90-90-90 goals represents an ambitious strategy to end the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) epidemic by 2020 [UNAIDS, 2015]. While viral load (VL) quantification is the gold standard of HIV treatment monitoring, it is only routinely available and employed in resource-rich countries. The use of an affordable, reliable, point-of-care (POC) VL assay has been considered a "game-changer", where increased access, minimal lab worker training, and same day results could be addressed in a single solution. To date, POC VL assays have been evaluated by their manufacturers with reference panels of samples with some in-country laboratory evaluations. While these are appropriate and critical first steps, it is also important to evaluate the impact of this new technology against the standard of care (SOC) method of VL monitoring in an actual resource-limited setting. Nigeria has the second highest burden of HIV in the world, with an estimated 3.2 million infected and serves as a relevant setting for testing feasibility and efficacy of POC VL monitoring [UNAIDS, 2016]. In order to present the case for implementing the use of POC VL testing across Nigeria, data on the acceptability, feasibility and efficacy of using POC testing for VL monitoring are needed. To address this need, the investigators have designed a randomized controlled trial comparing POC VL to monitoring to the SOC, which follows the Nigerian National Guidelines, to provide operational evidence for implementation of POC VL testing in Nigeria. This trial is aimed at testing the hypothesis that using POC versus SOC VL monitoring in HIV-infected patients newly initiating ART will improve overall ART outcomes, increase ART adherence and program retention rates, and result in faster switches to second-line treatment of patients failing first-line ART.
Detailed Description
The investigators will conduct an un-blinded randomized implementation trial comparing POC VL monitoring, using the Cepheid Gene Xpert HIV-1 VL®, to SOC VL monitoring, using the Roche AmpliPrep/COBAS Taqman system. The trial will be conducted at two sites in Plateau State, Nigeria. ART-naïve patients initiating ART will be randomized on a 1:1 basis to the SOC VL monitoring control arm or the POC VL monitoring arm. VL monitoring will occur according to the current Nigerian ART guidelines-recommended algorithm, with the addition of a baseline VL test. For the month 6 and 12 visits, patients that are enrolled in the POC VL monitoring arm will be provided their VL results. Participants in the SOC arm will receive their Roche VL test results after the results become available per SOC protocol. All other aspects of their HIV care and treatment will be identical to services that they would normally receive at these treatment centers. The investigators will follow all patients up through their Month 12 follow-up visit. At trial exit, the investigators will ask patients, caregivers of patients under the age of 18 years, and providers for their participation in surveys on the operational performance and acceptability of the POC versus SOC VL monitoring. Following that time point, the patients will continue receiving HIV care and treatment utilizing the SOC procedures for the clinic.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
HIV/AIDS
Keywords
Point-of-care, Viral load monitoring, Nigeria

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Supportive Care
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
Patients will be randomized to have their viral load monitored by either the standard of care or point-of-care method at their follow-up clinical visits up to 12 months.
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
543 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Standard of Care (SOC)
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
Patients in this arm will have their viral load monitored using the standard of care method, using the Roche Cobas TaqMan HIV-1® v2 (Roche) assay.
Arm Title
Point-of-care (POC)
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Patients in this arm will have their follow-up viral loads (after baseline) monitored using a Point-of-care viral load monitoring test, the Cepheid Xpert HIV-1 Viral Load assay.
Intervention Type
Diagnostic Test
Intervention Name(s)
Point-of-care viral load monitoring test
Intervention Description
For enumerating viral load for patients in the POC arm, we will use the Cepheid Xpert® HIV-1 Viral Load test, a quantitative assay with a quantification range of 40 to 10,000,000 copies/mL. Based on the GeneXpert® technology, Xpert HIV-1 VL automates the test process, including RNA extraction, purification, reverse transcription and cDNA real-time quantitation in one fully integrated cartridge. The pre-loaded disposable single-use cartridges provide a visual read-out within 90 minutes. The assay requires 1 mL of plasma using a precision pipette (1.2 mL using a transfer pipette).
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Proportion of patients with VL<1000 copies/mL at month 12 post-initiation of ART (range 11-15 months) in SOC VL versus POC VL
Description
Proportion of patients that have undetectable viral load at the end of observation (month 12) will be compared by treatment arm
Time Frame
12 months (range 11-15 months)
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Difference in ART adherence patterns in patients in the SOC versus POC VL arms
Description
Average percent adherence will be computed using patient refill data that are stored electronically. The average will be calculated as number of days supplied over total days in the given time interval, adjusting for amount of medication that should remain since last refill, computed based on amount supplied during the previous visit minus the number of days since the last visit.
Time Frame
From ART initiation to month 12
Title
Difference in loss to follow-up rates by 12 months post-initiation of ART between patients monitored with SOC versus POC VL arms
Description
LTFU at month 12 is defined as not having made any refill pick-ups or clinical visits since 9-month post-initiation of ART.
Time Frame
Month 12
Title
Impact of trial site on differences in virologic suppression rates within patients receiving SOC VL monitoring
Description
Comparison of data from two different trial sites
Time Frame
Month 12
Title
Difference in time from ART initiation to the confirmation of virologic failure in SOC versus POC VL monitoring arms
Description
Subset analysis in those that experienced virologic failure (confirmed)
Time Frame
ART Initiation to Month 12
Title
Difference in time from ART initiation to switch to 2L treatment in patients in VF in SOC versus POC VL monitoring arms
Description
Subset analysis in those that experienced virologic failure (confirmed)
Time Frame
ART Initiation to Month 12
Title
Difference in time from specimen collection to availability of VL results in patient charts in SOC versus POC VL monitoring arms
Description
Comparison of time from specimen collection to the time the result is entered into the patient chart by treatment arm
Time Frame
All follow-up visits at which VL monitored up to Month 12
Title
Difference in time from specimen collection to delivery of VL results to patient in SOC versus POC VL monitoring arms
Description
Comparison of time from specimen collection to the time the result is verbally conveyed to the patient by their clinician by treatment arm
Time Frame
All follow-up visits at which VL monitored up to Month 12
Title
Difference in time from lab confirmation of first unsuppressed VL to adherence counseling provided and switch to 2L in SOC versus POC VL monitoring arms
Description
Subset analysis in those that experienced virologic failure (confirmed)
Time Frame
All follow-up visits at which VL monitored up to Month 12
Title
Difference in HIV DRM patterns in patients failing 1L ART in the SOC versus POC VL monitoring arm
Description
Subset analysis in those that experienced virologic failure (confirmed)
Time Frame
Month 12
Title
Health care worker (HCW) satisfaction level with POC versus SOC VL monitoring
Description
Health care workers will complete a standardized survey querying about their satisfaction with the POC assay. The survey uses a scale measuring agreement level. The scale ranges from 0 to 5 where 0=not applicable, 1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree
Time Frame
Month 12
Title
POC VL arm patient satisfaction with POC vs SOC VL testing
Description
POC VL arm patients will be queried using a standardized survey about their satisfaction with the POC VL assay. The survey uses a scale measuring agreement level. The scale ranges from 0 to 5 where 0=not applicable, 1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree.
Time Frame
Month 12

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: -All HIV-infected patients newly initiating ART Exclusion Criteria: Previous ARV experience Pregnant
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Phyllis Kanki, DVM, DSc
Organizational Affiliation
Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Jos University Teaching Hospital
City
Jos
State/Province
Plateau
Country
Nigeria
Facility Name
Comprehensive Health Care Centre, Zamko
City
Zamko
State/Province
Plateau
Country
Nigeria

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
Yes
IPD Sharing Plan Description
The study data set from the proposed trial, stripped of all identifying information and anonymized to protect patient confidentiality, will be available upon request within 30 months of the end of data collection.
IPD Sharing Time Frame
Within 30 months of the end of data collection
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
Reasonable request via secondary data use application per review of project Principal Investigators.
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
26423384
Citation
Fonjungo PN, Boeras DI, Zeh C, Alexander H, Parekh BS, Nkengasong JN. Access and Quality of HIV-Related Point-of-Care Diagnostic Testing in Global Health Programs. Clin Infect Dis. 2016 Feb 1;62(3):369-374. doi: 10.1093/cid/civ866. Epub 2015 Sep 30.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26807969
Citation
Fonjungo PN, Osmanov S, Kuritsky J, Ndihokubwayo JB, Bachanas P, Peeling RW, Timperi R, Fine G, Stevens W, Habiyambere V, Nkengasong JN. Ensuring quality: a key consideration in scaling-up HIV-related point-of-care testing programs. AIDS. 2016 May 15;30(8):1317-23. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001031.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
31046695
Citation
Meloni ST, Agbaji O, Chang CA, Agaba P, Imade G, Oguche S, Mukhtar A, Mitruka K, Cox MH, Zee A, Kanki P. The role of point-of-care viral load monitoring in achieving the target of 90% suppression in HIV-infected patients in Nigeria: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Infect Dis. 2019 May 2;19(1):368. doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-3983-6.
Results Reference
derived
Links:
URL
http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/JC2670_UNAIDS_Treatment_Targets_en.pdf
Description
UNAIDS. Ambitious treatment targets: writing the final chapter of the AIDS epidemic. 2015.
URL
http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/147213/1/9789241507905_eng.pdf
Description
WHO. The Availability and Use of HIV Diagnostics: A 2012/2013 WHO Survey in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Geneva. 2014.
URL
http://www.unaids.org/en/regionscountries/countries/nigeria
Description
UNAIDS. Country factsheets: Nigeria, 2016.
URL
http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/documents/s23252en/s23252en.pdf
Description
FMOH Nigeria. National Guidelines for Prevention Treatment and Care. 2016.

Learn more about this trial

Reaching 90% HIV Suppression: The Role of POC Viral Load Monitoring in Nigeria

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs