The Essential Need for Trust When Transmission Risk Cannot Be Eliminated in HIV-Remission Trials

Q2 Social Sciences Ethics & human research Pub Date : 2023-06-27 DOI:10.1002/eahr.500172
Stuart Rennie, Gail Henderson, Nittaya Phanuphak, Kristine Kuczynski, Donn Colby, Nuchanart Ormsby, Eugene Kroon, Denise Hsu, Udom Likhitwonnawut, Sandhya Vasan, Carlo Sacdalan, Thidarat Jupimai, Oratai Butterworth, Holly Peay
{"title":"The Essential Need for Trust When Transmission Risk Cannot Be Eliminated in HIV-Remission Trials","authors":"Stuart Rennie,&nbsp;Gail Henderson,&nbsp;Nittaya Phanuphak,&nbsp;Kristine Kuczynski,&nbsp;Donn Colby,&nbsp;Nuchanart Ormsby,&nbsp;Eugene Kroon,&nbsp;Denise Hsu,&nbsp;Udom Likhitwonnawut,&nbsp;Sandhya Vasan,&nbsp;Carlo Sacdalan,&nbsp;Thidarat Jupimai,&nbsp;Oratai Butterworth,&nbsp;Holly Peay","doi":"10.1002/eahr.500172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Analytic treatment interruption (ATI) is scientifically necessary in HIV-remission (“cure”) studies to test the effects of new interventions. However, stopping antiretroviral treatment poses risks to research participants and their sexual partners. Ethical debate about whether and how to conduct such studies has largely centered on designing risk-mitigation strategies and identifying the responsibilities of research stakeholders. In this paper, we argue that because the possibility of HIV transmission from research participants to partners during ATI cannot practicably be eliminated—that is, it is ineliminable—the successful conduct of such trials ultimately depends on relationships of trust and trustworthiness. We describe our experiences with conducting and studying HIV-remission trials with ATI in Thailand to examine the strengths, complexities, and limitations of the risk-mitigation and responsibility approaches and to explore ways in which the building of trust—and trustworthiness—may help enhance the scientific, practical, and ethical dimensions of these trials.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36829,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & human research","volume":"45 4","pages":"2-15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & human research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eahr.500172","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Analytic treatment interruption (ATI) is scientifically necessary in HIV-remission (“cure”) studies to test the effects of new interventions. However, stopping antiretroviral treatment poses risks to research participants and their sexual partners. Ethical debate about whether and how to conduct such studies has largely centered on designing risk-mitigation strategies and identifying the responsibilities of research stakeholders. In this paper, we argue that because the possibility of HIV transmission from research participants to partners during ATI cannot practicably be eliminated—that is, it is ineliminable—the successful conduct of such trials ultimately depends on relationships of trust and trustworthiness. We describe our experiences with conducting and studying HIV-remission trials with ATI in Thailand to examine the strengths, complexities, and limitations of the risk-mitigation and responsibility approaches and to explore ways in which the building of trust—and trustworthiness—may help enhance the scientific, practical, and ethical dimensions of these trials.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
当艾滋病毒缓解试验不能消除传播风险时,信任的基本需要
分析性治疗中断(ATI)在艾滋病毒缓解(“治愈”)研究中是科学必要的,以测试新的干预措施的效果。然而,停止抗逆转录病毒治疗对研究参与者及其性伴侣构成风险。关于是否以及如何进行此类研究的伦理辩论主要集中在设计风险缓解战略和确定研究利益相关者的责任上。在本文中,我们认为,由于在ATI期间,HIV从研究参与者传播给合作伙伴的可能性实际上无法消除——也就是说,它是不可消除的——此类试验的成功进行最终取决于信任和可信赖的关系。我们描述了我们在泰国与ATI一起开展和研究hiv缓解试验的经验,以检查风险缓解和责任方法的优势、复杂性和局限性,并探索建立信任和可信度的方法,这些方法可能有助于提高这些试验的科学性、实用性和伦理性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ethics & human research
Ethics & human research Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The Prospect of Artificial Intelligence-Supported Ethics Review Ethical Issues Faced by Data Monitoring Committees: Results from an Exploratory Qualitative Study The Ethical Case for Decentralized Clinical Trials The European Health Data Space as a Case Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1