Perceptions of Equipoise, Risk–Benefit Ratios, and “Otherwise Healthy Volunteers” in the Context of Early-Phase HIV Cure Research in the United States: A Qualitative Inquiry

Author:

Dubé Karine1,Dee Lynda234,Evans David35,Sylla Laurie6,Taylor Jeff7,Brown Brandon8,Miller Veronica9,Corneli Amy10,Skinner Asheley110,Greene Sandra B.1,Tucker Joseph D.1112,Rennie Stuart13

Affiliation:

1. UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

2. AIDS Action Baltimore, MD, USA

3. Delaney AIDS Research Enterprise Community Advisory Board, San Francisco, CA, USA

4. amfAR Institute for HIV Cure Research CAB, San Francisco, CA, USA

5. Project Inform, San Francisco, CA, USA

6. defeatHIV CAB, Seattle, CA, USA

7. Collaboratory of AIDS Researchers for Eradication, Palm Springs, CA, USA

8. University of California, Riverside, CA, USA

9. Forum for Collaborative HIV Research, Washington, DC, USA

10. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA

11. UNC Project China, Guangzhou, China

12. UNC Institute of Global Health and Infectious Diseases, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

13. UNC Center for Bioethics, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Abstract

Early-phase HIV cure research is conducted against a background of highly effective antiretroviral therapy, and involves risky interventions in individuals who enjoy an almost normal life expectancy. To explore perceptions of three ethical topics in the context of HIV cure research—(a) equipoise, (b) risk–benefit ratios, and (c) “otherwise healthy volunteers”—we conducted 36 in-depth interviews (IDIs) with three groups of purposively selected key informants: clinician-researchers ( n = 11), policy-makers and bioethicists ( n = 13), and people living with HIV (PLWHIV; n = 12). Our analysis revealed variability in perceptions of equipoise. Second, most key informants believed there was no clear measure of risk–benefit ratios in HIV cure research, due in part to the complexity of weighing (sometimes unknown) risks to participants and (sometimes speculative) benefits to science and society. Third, most clinician-researchers and policy-makers/bioethicists viewed potential HIV cure study participants as “otherwise healthy volunteers,” but this perception was not shared among PLWHIV in our study.

Funder

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Communication,Education,Social Psychology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3