Objectives We examined the efficacy of a peer-driven intervention to increase rates of screening for AIDS clinical trials among African Americans and Hispanics living with HIV/AIDS. Methods We used a randomized controlled trial design to examine the efficacy of peer-driven intervention (6 hours of structured sessions and the opportunity to educate 3 peers) compared with a time-matched control intervention. Participants were recruited using respondent-driven sampling (n=342; 43.9% female; 64.9% African American, 26.6% Hispanic).Most participants (93.3%) completed intervention sessions and 64.9% recruited or educated peers. Baseline and post-baseline interviews (94.4% completed) were computer-assisted. A mixed model was used to examine intervention effects on screening. Results Screening was much more likely in the peer-driven intervention than in the control arm (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=55.0; z=5.49, P<.001); about half of the participants in the intervention arm (46.0%) were screened compared with 1.6% of controls. The experience of recruiting and educating each peer also increased screening odds among those who were themselves recruited and educated by peers (AOR=1.4; z=2.06, P<.05). Conclusions Peer-driven intervention was highly efficacious in increasing AIDS clinical trial screening rates among African Americans and Hispanics living with HIV/AIDS.

Nationally up to 60 % of persons living with HIV are neither taking antiretroviral therapy (ART) nor well engaged in HIV care, mainly racial/ethnic minorities. This study examined a new culturally targeted multi-component intervention to address emotional, attitudinal, and social/structural barriers to ART initiation and HIV care. Participants (N = 95) were African American/Black and Latino adults with CD4<500 cells/mm3 not taking ART, randomized 1:1 to intervention or control arms, the latter receiving treatment as usual. Primary endpoints were adherence, evaluated via ART concentrations in hair samples, and HIV viral load suppression. The intervention was feasible and acceptable. Eight months post-baseline, intervention participants tended to be more likely to evidence “good” (that is, 7 days/week) adherence (60 vs. 26.7 %; p = 0.087; OR = 3.95), and had lower viral load levels than controls (t(22) = 2.29, p = 0.032; OR = 5.20), both large effect sizes. This highly promising intervention merits further study.

Persons living with HIV/AIDS (PLHA) of color are under-represented in AIDS clinical trials (ACTs), which may limit the generalizability of research findings and denies many individuals access to high levels of care and new treatments available through ACTs. Disproportionately low rates of recruitment in health care settings and by providers are a major barrier to ACTs for this group. Moreover, PLHA of color are more likely than their white peers to decline to participate, mainly due to fear and mistrust (although willingness is also high), negative social norms about ACTs, and difficulty navigating the unfamiliar ACT system. We describe a small number of successful behavioral and structural interventions to increase the participation of PLHA of color in screening for and enrollment into ACTs. HIV care settings, clinical trials sites, and trial sponsors are uniquely positioned to develop procedures, supports, and trials to increase the proportion of PLHA of color in ACTs.

A substantial proportion of persons living with HIV/AIDS (PLHA) delay, decline, or discontinue antiretroviral therapy (ART) when it is medically indicated (40–45%), largely African-Americans and Latinos/Hispanics. This study explores the feasibility of locating PLHA, who are not on ART (PLHA-NOA) through clinics and peer-referral; compares the two cohorts on multi-level barriers to ART; and examines readiness to initiate/reinitiate ART, a predictor of treatment outcomes. We recruited adult HIV-infected African-American and Latino/Hispanic PLHA-NOA through HIV hospital clinics and peer-referral in 2012–2013. Participants were engaged in structured 1-h assessments with reliable/valid measures on barriers to ART. We found that recruitment through peers (63.2%, 60/95) was more feasible than in clinics (36.8%, 35/90). Participants were 48.0 years old and had lived with HIV for 14.7 years on average, and 56.8% had taken ART previously. Most (61.1%) were male and African-American (76.8%), and 23.2% were Latino/Hispanic. Peer-recruited participants were older, had lived with HIV longer, were less engaged in HIV care, and were more likely to have taken ART previously. The cohorts differed in reasons for discontinuing ART. Levels of ART knowledge were comparable between cohorts (68.5% correct), and there were no differences in attitudes toward ART (e.g., mistrust), which were in the neutral range. In bivariate linear regression, readiness for ART was negatively associated with physician mistrust (B = −10.4) and positively associated with self-efficacy (B = 5.5), positive outcome expectancies (B = 6.3), beliefs about personal necessity of ART (B = 17.5), and positive internal norms (B = 7.9). This study demonstrates the feasibility of engaging this vulnerable population through peer-referral. Peer-recruited PLHA evidence particularly high rates of risk factors compared to those in hospital clinics. Interventions to support ART initiation and continuation are sorely needed for both subgroups.

BackgroundOver 50,000 individuals become infected with HIV annually in the U.S., and over a quarter of HIV infected individuals are heterosexuals. Undiagnosed HIV infection, as well as a lack of retention in care among those diagnosed, are both primary factors contributing to ongoing HIV incidence. Further, there are racial/ethnic disparities in undiagnosed HIV and engagement in care, with African Americans/Blacks and Latinos remaining undiagnosed longer and less engaged in care than Whites, signaling the need for culturally targeted intervention approaches to seek and test those with undiagnosed HIV infection, and link them to care with high retention.Methods/DesignThe study has two components: one to seek out and test heterosexuals at high risk for HIV infection, and another to link those found infected to HIV care with high retention. We will recruit sexually active African American/Black and Latino adults who have opposite sex partners, negative or unknown HIV status, and reside in locations with high poverty and HIV prevalence. The “Seek and Test” component will compare the efficacy and cost effectiveness of two strategies to uncover undiagnosed HIV infection: venue-based sampling and respondent-driven sampling (RDS). Among those recruited by RDS and found to have HIV infection, a “Treat and Retain” component will assess the efficacy of a peer-driven intervention compared to a control arm with respect to time to an HIV care appointment and health indicators using a cluster randomized controlled trial design to minimize contamination. RDS initial seeds will be randomly assigned to the intervention or control arm at a 1:1 ratio and all recruits will be assigned to the same arm as the recruiter. Participants will be followed for 12 months with outcomes assessed using medical records and biomarkers, such as HIV viral load.DiscussionHeterosexuals do not test for HIV as frequently as and are diagnosed later than other risk groups. The study has the potential to contribute an efficient, innovative, and sustainable multi-level recruitment approach and intervention to the HIV prevention portfolio. Because the majority of heterosexuals at high risk are African American/Black or Latino, the study has great potential to reduce racial/ethnic disparities in HIV/AIDS.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01607541, Registered May 23, 2012.