Participant experiences using novel home-based blood collection device for viral load testing in HIV cure trials with analytical treatment interruptions

References

• Julg B, Dee L, Ananworanich J, et al. Recommendations for analytical antiretroviral treatment interruptions in HIV research trials—report of a consensus meeting. Lancet HIV. 2019;6(4):e259–e268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li JZ, Smith DM, Mellors JW. The need for treatment interruption studies and biomarker identification in the search for an HIV cure. AIDS. 2015;29(12):1429–1432.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giron L, Papasavvas E, Yin X, et al. Phospholipid metabolism is associated with time to HIV rebound upon treatment interruption. MBio. 2021;12(1):e03444-20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giron L, Palmer C, Liu Q, et al. Non-invasive plasma glycomic and metabolic biomarkers of post-treatment control of HIV. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):3922.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garner SA, Rennie S, Ananworanich J, et al. Interrupting antiretroviral treatment in HIV cure research: scientific and ethical considerations. J Virus Erad. 2017;3(2):82–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubé K, Auerbach JD, Stirratt MJ, Gaist P. Applying the behavioural and social sciences research (BSSR) functional framework to HIV cure research. J Int AIDS Soc. 2019;22(10):e25404.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tasso. [cited 28 Aug 2021]. Available: https://www.tassoinc.com/
   Google Scholar
• Dubé K, Evans D, Dee L, et al. We need to deploy them very thoughtfully and carefully: perceptions of analytical treatment interruptions in HIV cure. AIDS Res Hum Retrovirus. 2018;34(1):67–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medina-Marino A, de Vos L, Bezuidenhout D, et al. I got tested at home, the help came to me: acceptability and feasibility of home-based TB testing of household contacts using portable molecular diagnostics in South Africa. Trop Med Int Health. 2021;26(3):343–354.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armstrong-Hough M, Ggita J, Turimumahoro P, et al. Something so hard: a mixed-methods study of home sputum collection for tuberculosis contact investigation in Uganda. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2018;22(10):1152–1159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta-Wright A, Manabe YC. Implementation science: point-of-care diagnostics in HIV and tuberculosis. Clin Med (Lond). 2019;19(2):145–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sudharsanan N, Chen S, Garber M, Bärnighausen T, Geldsetzer P. The effect of home-based hypertension screening on blood pressure change over time in South Africa. Health Aff (Millwood). 2020;39(1):124–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuller G, Njune Mouapi K, Joung S, et al. Feasibility of patient-centric remote dried blood sampling: the prediction, risk, and evaluation of major adverse cardiac events (PRE-MACE) study. Biodemogr Soc Biol. 2020;65(4):313–322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke S, Foster J. A history of blood glucose meters and their role in self-monitoring of diabetes mellitus. Br J Biomed Sci. 2012;69(2):83–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melendez J, Hamill M, Armington G, Gaydos C, Manabe Y. Home-based testing for sexually transmitted infections: leveraging online resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sex Transm Dis. 2021;48(1):e8–e10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Breithaupt L, Des Marais A, et al. Acceptability and ease of use of mailed HPV self-collection among infrequently screened women in North Carolina. Sex Transm Infect. 2018;94(2):131–137.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bansil P, Wittet S, Lim JL, Winkler JL, Paul P, Jeronimo J. Acceptability of self-collection sampling for HPV-DNA testing in low-resource settings: a mixed methods approach. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:596.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fajardo-Bernal L, Aponte-Gonzalez J, Vigil P, et al. Home-based versus clinic-based specimen collection in the management of chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2015(9):CD011317.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunny C, Taylor D, Hoang L, et al. Self-collected versus clinician-collected sampling for chlamydia and gonorrhea screening: a systemic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0132776-23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn JA, Bernstein DI, Rosenthal SL, et al. Acceptability of Human papillomavirus self testing in female adolescents. Sex Transm Infect. 2005;81(5):408–414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huppert JS, Hesse EA, Bernard MA, et al. Acceptability of self-testing for trichomoniasis increases with experience. Sex Transm Infect. 2011;87(6):494–500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiro JA, Betts AC, Kimbel K, et al. Understanding patients’ perspectives and information needs following a positive home human papillomavirus self-sampling kit result. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2019;28(3):384–392.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearson WS, Kreisel K, Peterman TA, et al. Improving STD service delivery: would american patients and providers use self-tests for gonorrhea and chlamydia? Prev Med. 2018;115:26–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sultana F, Mullins R, English DR, et al. Women’s experience with home-based self-sampling for human papillomavirus testing. BMC Cancer. 2015;15(1):1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Colfax G, Lehman J, Bindman A, et al. What happened to home HIV test collection kits? Intent to use kits, actual use, and barriers to use among persons at risk for HIV infection. AIDS Care. 2002;14(5):675–626.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Figueroa C, Johnson C, Ford N, et al. Reliability of HIV rapid diagnostic tests for self-testing compared with testing by health-care workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet HIV. 2018;5(6):e277–e90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Figueroa C, Johnson C, Verster A, Baggaley R. Attitudes and acceptability on HIV self-testing among key populations: a literature review. AIDS Behav. 2015;19(11):1949–1965.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tucker JD, Wei C, Pendse R, Lo Y-R. HIV self-testing among key populations: an implementation science approach to evaluating self-testing. J Virus Erad. 2015;1(1):38–42.
   Google Scholar
• Mugo C, Wang J, Begnel ER, et al. Home- and clinic-based pediatric HIV index case testing in Kenya: uptake, HIV prevalence, linkage to care, and missed opportunities. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2020;85(5):535–542.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibitoye M, Lappen H, Freeman R, Jordan AE, Aronson ID. Technology-based interventions to increase point-of-care HIV testing and linkage to care among youth in the US: a systematic review. AIDS Behav. 2021;25(6):1829–1838.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merchant RC, Clark MA, Liu T, et al. Comparison of home-based oral fluid rapid HIV self-testing versus mail-in blood sample collection or medical/community HIV testing by young adult Black, Hispanic, and White MSM: results from a randomized trial. AIDS Behav. 2018;22(1):337–346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siegler AJ, Mayer KH, Liu AY, et al. Developing and assessing the feasibility of a home-based preexposure prophylaxis monitoring and support program. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;68(3):501–504.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau JSY, Smith MZ, Allan B, et al. Perspectives on analytical treatment interruptions in people living with HIV and their health care providers in the landscape of HIV cure-focused studies. AIDS Res Hum Retrovirus. 2019;2:1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Dubé K, Kanazawa J, Roebuck C, et al. We are looking at the future right now: community acceptability of a home-based viral load test device in the context of HIV cure-related research with analytical treatment interruptions in the United States. HIV Res Clin Pract. 2022;1–16. Online ahead of print.
   Google Scholar
• Dubé K, Eskaf S, Hastie E, et al. Preliminary acceptability of a home-based peripheral blood collection device for viral load testing in the context of analytical treatment interruptions in HIV cure trials: results from a nationwide survey in the United States. J Pers Med. 2022;12:1–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cresswell J. Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How many interviews are enough?: An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods. 2006;18(1):59–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peluso MJ, Dee L, Shao S, et al. Operationalizing HIV cure-related trials with analytic treatment interruptions during the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic: a collaborative approach. Clin Infect Dis. 2021;72(10):1843–1849. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhatti P, Kampa D, Alexander BH, et al. Blood spots as an alternative to whole blood collection and the effect of a small monetary incentive to increase participation in genetic association studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009;9:76–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rockett JC, Buck GM, Lynch CD, Perreault SD. The value of home-based collection of biospecimens in reproductive epidemiology. Environ Health Perspect. 2004;112(1):94–104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solheim SA, Ringsted TK, Nordsborg NB, Dehnes Y, Levernaes MCS, Mørkeberg J. No pain, just gain: painless, easy, and fast dried blood spot collection from fingertip and upper arm in doping control. Drug Test Anal. 2021;13(10):1783–1790.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendelman T, Chaudhary A, LeClair AC, et al. Self-collection of capillary blood using Tasso-SST devices for Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody testing. PLoS One. 2021;16(9):e0255841–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar