Next steps for research on hormonal contraception and HIV

The Lancet

Volumn 382, Issue 9903, 2013, Pages 1467-1469

  Ralph, Lauren J ^a   McCoy, Sandra I ^a   Hallett, Timothy ^b   Padian, Nancy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COPPER INTRAUTERINE DEVICE; LEVONORGESTREL; MEDROXYPROGESTERONE ACETATE; NORETHISTERONE ENANTATE;

CONDOM; DECISION MAKING; FAMILY PLANNING; HORMONAL CONTRACEPTION; HUMAN; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS INFECTION; INFECTION RISK; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

EID: 84886793400     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: 1474547X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61420-8     Document Type: Note

References (17)

1. World Health Organization. Hormonal contraception and HIV: technical statement. Geneva, Switzerland; Research DoRHa, 2012.
2. Morrison CS, Nanda K. Hormonal contraception and HIV: an unanswered question. Lancet Infect Dis 2012; 12: 2-3.
3. Polis CB, Curtis KM. Hormonal contraception and HIV acquisition in women: a systematic review of the epidemiological evidence. In: XIX International AIDS Conference. Washington, DC, 2012. WEAC0203.
4. United Nations. United Nations international conference on population and development. Programme of action. Cairo, Sept 5-13, 1994.
5. Hubacher D, Raymond ER, Beksinka M, et al. Hormonal contraception and the risks of STI acquisition: results of a feasibility study to plan a future randomized trial. Contraception 2008; 77: 366-70.
6. Feldblum PJ, Caraway J, Bahamondes L, et al. Randomized assignment to copper IUD or depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate: feasibility of enrollment, continuation, and disease ascertainment. Contraception 2005; 72: 187-91.
7. Stringer EM, Kaseba C, Levy J, et al. A randomized trial of the intrauterine contraceptive device vs hormonal contraception in women who are infected with the human immunodefi ciency virus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197: 144e1-e8.
8. Blanchard K, Bostrom A, Montgomery E, et al. Contraception use and eff ectiveness among women in a trial of the diaphragm for HIV prevention. Contraception 2011; 83: 556-63.
9. Hubacher D, Mavranezouli I, McGinn E. Unintended pregnancy in sub-Saharan Africa: magnitude of the problem and potential role of contraceptive implants to alleviate it. Contraception 2008; 78: 73-78.
10. Pollack AE, Ross J, Perkin G. Intrauterine devices (IUDs) in developing countries: assessing opportunities for expanding access and use. Report prepared for the Hewlett Foundation, 2007. http://www.hewlett.org/library/intrauterine- devices-iuds-in-developing-countries-assessingopportunities- for-expanding-access-and-use (accessed June 6, 2013).
11. Hernan M, Hernandez-Diaz S. Beyond the intention-to-treat in comparative eff ectiveness research. Clin Trials 2012; 9: 48-55.
12. Toh S, Hernan M. Causal inference with longitudinal studies with baseline randomization. Int J Biostat 2008; 4: 1-28.
13. Jain AK. Hormonal contraception and HIV acquisition risk: implications for individual users and public policies. Contraception 2012; 86: 645-52.
14. Butler AR, Smith JA, Polis CB, et al. Modelling the global competing risks of a potential interaction between injectable hormonal contraception and HIV risk. AIDS 2012; 27: 105-13.
15. Singh S, Darroch JE, Ashford LS, Vlassoff M. Adding it up: the costs and benefi ts of investing in family planning and maternal and newbornhealth. New York: Guttmacher Institute and United Nations Population Fund, 2009.
16. Smith J, Butler AR, Polis CB, et al. Programmatic implications: balancing maternal mortality and HIV risk. 20th conference on retroviruses and opportunistic infections; Atlanta, GA; March 3-6, 2013. 114.
17. Heff ron R, Donnell D, Rees H, et al. Use of hormonal contraceptives and risk of HIV-1 transmission: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis 2012; 12: 19-26