Effectiveness of Cellulose Sulfate Vaginal Gel for the Prevention of HIV Infection: Results of a Phase III Trial in Nigeria
2008

Effectiveness of Cellulose Sulfate Vaginal Gel for Preventing HIV Infection

Sample size: 1644 publication 10 minutes Evidence: low

Author Information

Author(s): Halpern Vera, Ogunsola Folasade, Obunge Orikomaba, Wang Chin-Hua, Onyejepu Nneka, Oduyebo Oyinola, Taylor Doug, McNeil Linda, Mehta Neha, Umo-Otong John, Otusanya Sakiru, Crucitti Tania, Abdellati Said

Primary Institution: Family Health International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, United States of America

Hypothesis

Does cellulose sulfate vaginal gel effectively prevent male-to-female vaginal transmission of HIV, gonorrhea, and chlamydial infection?

Conclusion

Cellulose sulfate gel appeared to be safe but did not provide sufficient evidence to prevent male-to-female vaginal transmission of HIV, gonorrhea, or chlamydial infection.

Supporting Evidence

  • Fewer infections occurred in the CS group (10) than on placebo (13), but the difference was not statistically significant.
  • Rates of gonorrhea and chlamydial infection were lower in the CS group but the difference was likewise not statistically significant.
  • The trial was stopped prematurely after safety concerns were raised in a parallel trial.

Takeaway

The study tested a gel to help women avoid getting HIV, but it didn't work as well as hoped.

Methodology

This was a Phase III, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted over one year with HIV-negative women at high risk of HIV acquisition.

Potential Biases

High loss to follow-up and potential social desirability bias in self-reported behaviors.

Limitations

The trial was stopped prematurely, which limited the ability to draw definitive conclusions about the effectiveness of cellulose sulfate.

Participant Demographics

Participants were HIV-negative women aged 18-35, primarily low-income, and at high risk for HIV.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p=0.56

Confidence Interval

95% CI 0.3–1.8

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1371/journal.pone.0003784

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication