Potential Impacts of Participating in an HIV Cure-Related Trial With an Analytical Treatment Interruption on Partners: Qualitative Research Findings
Author(s)
Karine Dube, DrPH1, Kwanza Price, MPH2, Caroline Burk, PharmD, MS2, Megha Mehrotra, PhD, MPH2, Keith Dunn, PharmD2, Stephanie Loomer, MS3, William You, MSPH4, Kathleen Beusterien, MPH3, Lewis Kopenhafer, BA4, Sorana Segal-Maurer, MD5, Martin Duracinsky, PhD, MD6.
1University of California San Diego, School of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health, San Diego, CA, USA, 2Gilead Sciences Inc., Foster City, CA, USA, 3Oracle Life Sciences, Austin, TX, USA, 4Oracle Life Science, Austin, TX, USA, 5NewYork-Presbyterian Queens, The Dr James J Rahal Jr Division of Infectious Diseases, Flushing, NY, USA, 6Patient-Reported Outcomes Research (PROQOL), Health Economics Clinical Trial Unit (URC-ECO), Hôtel-Dieu Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France.
1University of California San Diego, School of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health, San Diego, CA, USA, 2Gilead Sciences Inc., Foster City, CA, USA, 3Oracle Life Sciences, Austin, TX, USA, 4Oracle Life Science, Austin, TX, USA, 5NewYork-Presbyterian Queens, The Dr James J Rahal Jr Division of Infectious Diseases, Flushing, NY, USA, 6Patient-Reported Outcomes Research (PROQOL), Health Economics Clinical Trial Unit (URC-ECO), Hôtel-Dieu Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France.
OBJECTIVES: To understand the perspectives of people with HIV (PWH) on how their participation in a potential HIV cure-related trial that includes an analytical treatment interruption (ATI) may affect their intimate partners.
METHODS: We conducted virtual interviews with 72 PWH from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, United Kingdom, South Africa, Australia, Argentina, Canada, Dominican Republic, and United States (June 2024-February 2025). We asked open-ended questions regarding how PWH perceived their participation in a trial involving ATI might affect any current or future partners. We used qualitative data analysis software for thematic analysis of the transcripts.
RESULTS: Overall, 33/72 (46%) PWH reported they have a primary/main partner. Approximately half of PWH (40/72; 56%) did not anticipate that their own trial participation would meaningfully affect their partners. PWH believed their partners would be supportive, indicated enrolling was their own decision, and did not expect their partners to be emotionally or practically affected (eg, by needing to adjust routines or taking on additional responsibilities). 24/72 (33%) PWH mentioned potential negative impacts on partners. Specifically, PWH raised concerns about the need for open communication about risks, potential emotional stress due to possible loss of viral suppression, and shared decision-making around safety, trust, and sexual practices. A subset (15/68; 22%) expressed support for offering pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) as an option for their partners. While some PWH (13/68; 19%) indicated that provision of PrEP to their partners would influence their own decision to participate in the trial, more (27/68; 40%) said that it would not.
CONCLUSIONS: PWH did not anticipate major impacts on their current or future partners with participation in a potential HIV cure-related trial with ATI. Nevertheless, open communication was encouraged, and provision of PrEP to partners may influence potential trial participants. Additional studies are needed to assess partners’ perspectives and any anticipated effects on trial participants’ intimate relationships.
METHODS: We conducted virtual interviews with 72 PWH from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, United Kingdom, South Africa, Australia, Argentina, Canada, Dominican Republic, and United States (June 2024-February 2025). We asked open-ended questions regarding how PWH perceived their participation in a trial involving ATI might affect any current or future partners. We used qualitative data analysis software for thematic analysis of the transcripts.
RESULTS: Overall, 33/72 (46%) PWH reported they have a primary/main partner. Approximately half of PWH (40/72; 56%) did not anticipate that their own trial participation would meaningfully affect their partners. PWH believed their partners would be supportive, indicated enrolling was their own decision, and did not expect their partners to be emotionally or practically affected (eg, by needing to adjust routines or taking on additional responsibilities). 24/72 (33%) PWH mentioned potential negative impacts on partners. Specifically, PWH raised concerns about the need for open communication about risks, potential emotional stress due to possible loss of viral suppression, and shared decision-making around safety, trust, and sexual practices. A subset (15/68; 22%) expressed support for offering pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) as an option for their partners. While some PWH (13/68; 19%) indicated that provision of PrEP to their partners would influence their own decision to participate in the trial, more (27/68; 40%) said that it would not.
CONCLUSIONS: PWH did not anticipate major impacts on their current or future partners with participation in a potential HIV cure-related trial with ATI. Nevertheless, open communication was encouraged, and provision of PrEP to partners may influence potential trial participants. Additional studies are needed to assess partners’ perspectives and any anticipated effects on trial participants’ intimate relationships.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-11, ISPOR Europe 2025, Glasgow, Scotland
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S2
Code
PCR188
Topic
Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes
Disease
Infectious Disease (non-vaccine)