HIV PreventionNCT06397690
Supporting Oral and Long-acting PrEP Decision Making Among Pregnant Women in Lilongwe, Malawi
A study testing My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice) in people with HIV Prevention, run by University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill at 1 site in Malawi.
Trial summary
Purpose: The overall objective of this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of a shared decision-making (SDM) intervention to support personally appropriate decision making about Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use during pregnancy and breastfeeding. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- HIV Prevention
- What is being tested?
- My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice)
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 75 participants
- Where
- 1 siteMalawi
- Study dates
- 10 Feb 2025to 16 Jul 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- The criteria for pregnant women participants is as follows:
- Age 18 or older
- Documented pregnancy by urine pregnancy test or physical exam
- Documented negative HIV status within the past three months
- Identified factor(s) for elevated risk for HIV acquisition per PrEP national eligibility guidelines
- Willingness to remain in the study site's catchment area over the course of study follow-up and to comply with visit schedule
Show all 11Show fewer
- Ability and willingness to provide informed consent
- Investigators will also conduct interviews with male partners and study staff to assess exploratory qualitative outcomes. All study staff will be eligible to participate in an interview. Male partners will be eligible to participate if they meet the following criteria:
- Referred by a study participant as her romantic partner
- Age 18 or older
- Able and willing to provide informed consent
Who cannot join
- Positive HIV test at time of screening
- No identified HIV risk factors per national PrEP guidelines
- Risk for intimate partner violence or social harms as a result of participation, in the judgement of the study personnel
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: UNCPM 22325 - Supporting Oral and Long-acting Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Decision Making Among Pregnant Women in Lilongwe, Malawi: a Feasibility Pilot Study
Purpose: The overall objective of this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of a shared decision-making (SDM) intervention to support personally appropriate decision making about Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use during pregnancy and breastfeeding.
Participants: The primary population to be recruited for this study is HIV-negative pregnant women. For qualitative data collection only, investigators will also recruit male partners of these participants, and PrEP counselors and health care workers. The rationale behind focusing on pregnant women is because of the elevated HIV risk faced by women in the perinatal period. Investigators will recruit 50 women to participate in the feasibility pilot study. A subset of these participants will participate in qualitative interviews. Up to 10 male partners and up to 15 study staff will be recruited to participate in qualitative in-depth interviews.
Procedures (methods): Investigators propose a pilot feasibility study of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for pregnant women considering PrEP. 50 women will be randomized to receive either the SDM intervention addressing daily oral PrEP, Long-acting injectable cabotegravir (CAB-LA), and alternative HIV prevention methods (condoms), or standard of care counselling addressing the same prevention methods. In both studies, investigators will evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention and associated study procedures. Women expressing interest in either PrEP method will be referred to government PrEP services.
Read the detailed description
Study design:
Investigators propose a pilot feasibility study of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for pregnant women considering PrEP. 50 women will be randomized to receive either the SDM intervention addressing daily oral PrEP, CAB-LA, and alternative HIV prevention methods (condoms), or standard of care counselling addressing the same prevention methods. In both studies, investigators will evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention and associated study procedures. Women expressing interest in either PrEP method will be referred to government PrEP services.
Study intervention:
The study intervention, My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice), is a counselor-delivered shared decision-making approach for pregnant women considering PrEP. The intervention counseling will be delivered by trained study staff with a background in psychosocial counseling. The intervention consists of counseling facilitated by a SDM tool. The woman's partner may be present depending on her preference. It begins with a review of HIV risk in pregnancy/breastfeeding including discussion of population-specific risk factors which may apply to the participant. After understanding participant HIV risk and desire for HIV protection, the counselor presents HIV prevention options including CAB-LA, daily oral PrEP, and internal and external condoms (discussing attributes and potential advantages and disadvantages of each method). This is followed by a values clarification exercise to identify which features of the competing options matter most to the participant (product attributes and personal and interpersonal implications of each method). The counselor reviews information about these valued features for each offered method. This information and checks to understand and address any unmet participant decision support needs serve as the basis for structured deliberation to collaboratively identify participant preferred method(s).
Standard of care (control arm):
Participants randomized to the control arm will PrEP counseling as based on the current standard of care (SOC) . The SOC counseling will be delivered by a trained study staff member. The SOC counselor PrEP counseling according to national guidelines. Per current guidelines, the SOC counseling may include the following elements: An HIV risk assessment according to PrEP eligibility criteria; discussion of a combination prevention approach (PrEP and condoms) and risk reduction strategies. The women will receive comprehensive education on both the advantages and limitations of PrEP, including guidance on managing potential side effects. Subsequently, the counselor will assess the woman's eligibility, willingness, and readiness to start using PrEP. Women choosing oral PrEP during the SOC counseling session will be referred to government services to initiate PrEP. Participants choosing CAB-LA will initiate CAB-LA through the ongoing national pilot program.
Participants will be randomly assigned 1:1 to one of two study arms (intervention or comparison) using permuted block randomization. Participants will be blinded to their assignment, but study staff will not.
Participants choosing oral PrEP during the counselling session in either intervention or comparison arm will receive an assisted referral to government PrEP services at the study site to initiate their selected PrEP method per national guidelines. Participants choosing CAB-LA will initiate CAB-LA through the ongoing national pilot program. No study drug will be administered. Initiation of either PrEP method (i.e., receipt of prescription or injection) will be confirmed through clinic or pharmacy records, as well as information on reasons for non-initiation if applicable.
Investigators plan study follow-up visits at month 1 and month 2 following enrollment. Interviewer-administered questionnaires will be completed at the month 1 follow-up and the final follow-up visit (month 2). Questionnaires will assess study outcomes and associated social and behavioural measures to contextualize understanding of primary study outcomes. A subset of participants will complete in-depth qualitative interviews at month 1. Interviews will provide additional understanding of participant experiences with the intervention and experience using PrEP (if applicable).
- Conditions
- HIV Prevention
- Being tested
- My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice), Standard of care (control arm)
- Keywords
- PrEP in pregnancy and breastfeeding
- Medical subject headings
- Breast Feeding
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice)Behavioural
My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice) is a counselor-delivered shared decision-making approach for pregnant women considering PrEP
Standard of care (control arm)Behavioural
Standard of care (control arm) participants will receive comprehensive education on both the advantages and limitations of each PrEP method, including guidance on potential side effects.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice) | Experimental | The MyChoice intervention consists of PrEP shared decision-making counseling delivered by a trained counselor. It begins with a review of HIV risk in pregnancy/breastfeeding including discussion of population-specific risk factors which may apply to the participant. Next, the counselor presents HIV prevention options including CAB-LA, daily oral PrEP, and internal and external condoms (discussing attributes and potential advantages and disadvantages of each method). This is followed by a values clarification exercise to identify which features of the competing options matter most to the participant (product attributes and personal and interpersonal implications of each method). The counselor reviews information about these valued features for each offered method. This information and checks to understand and address any unmet participant decision support needs serve as the basis for structured deliberation to collaboratively identify participant preferred method(s). Receives: Behavioral: My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice) |
| Standard of care (control arm) | Active comparator | Participants randomized to the control arm will receive PrEP counseling as based on the current standard of care (SOC). The SOC counseling will be delivered by a trained study staff member. The SOC counselor PrEP counseling according to national guidelines. Control arm participants will receive comprehensive education on both the advantages and limitations of each PrEP method, including guidance on potential side effects. The SOC counselor will assess the woman's eligibility, willingness, and readiness to start using PrEP. Receives: Behavioral: Standard of care (control arm) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Acceptability of Intervention Measure Score
Intervention acceptability will be defined as the extent to which participants perceive the intervention to be agreeable, palatable, or satisfactory. Acceptability will be assessed through participant self-report using a validated 4-item scale. This scale measures how agreeable and satisfactory women find the intervention (responses rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "Completely Disagree" to "Completely Agree"). Range is 1-5 and higher scores indicate a greater acceptability.
Measured: enrollment, final follow up visit (Month 2)
Intervention Appropriateness Measure Score
Intervention appropriateness will be defined as the perceived relevance and usefulness of the intervention to support decision making about HIV prevention methods. Appropriateness will be assessed through self-report using a validated 4-item scale to measure women's perceptions of its relevance and usefulness (responses rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "Completely Disagree" to "Completely Agree"). Range is 1-5 and higher scores indicate a greater appropriateness.
Measured: enrollment, final follow up visit (Month 2)
Secondary outcomes (5)
Mean Number of Women Screened Weekly
The number of women screened on a weekly basis will be tracked and an average of weekly screening counts will be taken.
Measured: At screening
Proportion of Screened Eligible Women Enrolling in the study
The proportion of women who screen eligible for the study who choose to enroll will be assessed through study records.
Measured: At the time of enrollment
Proportion of Enrolled Participants Returning for Follow-Up Visits
The proportion of enrolled participants who return for 1-month and 2-month follow-up visits will be assessed through study records.
Measured: 1-month follow-up, 2-month follow-up
Number of Days Taken to Achieve Enrollment Targets from the Date of Enrollment Initiation
The total elapsed time in days from the first enrollment to the last will be assessed through study records.
Measured: At the time of enrollment
Number of Days Taken to Achieve Retention Targets from the Date of the First Scheduled Follow-up Visit
The total elapsed time in days from the first enrollment to the last study visit will be assessed through study records.
Measured: At the time of enrollment, 2-month follow-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 May 2024
- Study start10 Feb 2025
- Primary completion16 Jul 2025
- Study completion16 Jul 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for HIV PreventionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of North Carolina, Chapel HillThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 75 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Lauren Hill, PhD,MSPH, Principal investigator, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06397690
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 24-0511
- Other IDs
- P30AI050410
- Status last verified
- Jul 2025
- First submitted
- 19 Apr 2024
- Last updated
- 24 Jul 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Deidentified individual data that supports the results will be shared beginning 9 to 36 months following publication provided the investigator who proposes to use the data has approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB), Independent Ethics Committee (IEC), or Research Ethics Board (REB), as applicable, and executes a data use/sharing agreement with UNC.
Publications
Saidi F, Welch S, Phanga T, Sulpizio C, Paile L, Ngo'ma D, Tsidya M, Chindebvu M, Nkhoma G, Nkhalamba L, Kaliati I, Mkochi N, Chakala H, Kumwenda W, Bula A, Winner P, Munthali T, Nyamaizi A, Keys J, Maman S, Pearce L, Golin C, Chi BH, Hill LM. Supporting Oral and Long-Acting HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis Decision-Making Among Pregnant Women (MyChoice Intervention): Protocol for 2 Pilot Randomized Controlled Trials. JMIR Res Protoc. 2025 Nov 13;14:e76442. doi: 10.2196/76442.
PubMed 41232107
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Jul 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- UNCPM 22325 - Supporting Oral and Long-acting Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Decision Making Among Pregnant Women in Lilongwe, Malawi: a Feasibility Pilot Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06397690
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 24-0511
- Conditions
- HIV Prevention
- Keywords
- PrEP in pregnancy and breastfeeding
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 75 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of North Carolina, Chapel HillUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
- Study start
- 10 Feb 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 16 Jul 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 16 Jul 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 May 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Purpose: The overall objective of this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of a shared decision-making (SDM) intervention to support personally appropriate decision making about Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use during pregnancy and breastfeeding.
Participants: The primary population to be recruited for this study is HIV-negative pregnant women. For qualitative data collection only, investigators will also recruit male partners of these participants, and PrEP counselors and health care workers. The rationale behind focusing on pregnant women is because of the elevated HIV risk faced by women in the perinatal period. Investigators will recruit 50 women to participate in the feasibility pilot study. A subset of these participants will participate in qualitative interviews. Up to 10 male partners and up to 15 study staff will be recruited to participate in qualitative in-depth interviews.
Procedures (methods): Investigators propose a pilot feasibility study of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for pregnant women considering PrEP. 50 women will be randomized to receive either the SDM intervention addressing daily oral PrEP, Long-acting injectable cabotegravir (CAB-LA), and alternative HIV prevention methods (condoms), or standard of care counselling addressing the same prevention methods. In both studies, investigators will evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention and associated study procedures. Women expressing interest in either PrEP method will be referred to government PrEP services.
Detailed description
Study design:
Investigators propose a pilot feasibility study of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for pregnant women considering PrEP. 50 women will be randomized to receive either the SDM intervention addressing daily oral PrEP, CAB-LA, and alternative HIV prevention methods (condoms), or standard of care counselling addressing the same prevention methods. In both studies, investigators will evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention and associated study procedures. Women expressing interest in either PrEP method will be referred to government PrEP services.
Study intervention:
The study intervention, My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice), is a counselor-delivered shared decision-making approach for pregnant women considering PrEP. The intervention counseling will be delivered by trained study staff with a background in psychosocial counseling. The intervention consists of counseling facilitated by a SDM tool. The woman's partner may be present depending on her preference. It begins with a review of HIV risk in pregnancy/breastfeeding including discussion of population-specific risk factors which may apply to the participant. After understanding participant HIV risk and desire for HIV protection, the counselor presents HIV prevention options including CAB-LA, daily oral PrEP, and internal and external condoms (discussing attributes and potential advantages and disadvantages of each method). This is followed by a values clarification exercise to identify which features of the competing options matter most to the participant (product attributes and personal and interpersonal implications of each method). The counselor reviews information about these valued features for each offered method. This information and checks to understand and address any unmet participant decision support needs serve as the basis for structured deliberation to collaboratively identify participant preferred method(s).
Standard of care (control arm):
Participants randomized to the control arm will PrEP counseling as based on the current standard of care (SOC) . The SOC counseling will be delivered by a trained study staff member. The SOC counselor PrEP counseling according to national guidelines. Per current guidelines, the SOC counseling may include the following elements: An HIV risk assessment according to PrEP eligibility criteria; discussion of a combination prevention approach (PrEP and condoms) and risk reduction strategies. The women will receive comprehensive education on both the advantages and limitations of PrEP, including guidance on managing potential side effects. Subsequently, the counselor will assess the woman's eligibility, willingness, and readiness to start using PrEP. Women choosing oral PrEP during the SOC counseling session will be referred to government services to initiate PrEP. Participants choosing CAB-LA will initiate CAB-LA through the ongoing national pilot program.
Participants will be randomly assigned 1:1 to one of two study arms (intervention or comparison) using permuted block randomization. Participants will be blinded to their assignment, but study staff will not.
Participants choosing oral PrEP during the counselling session in either intervention or comparison arm will receive an assisted referral to government PrEP services at the study site to initiate their selected PrEP method per national guidelines. Participants choosing CAB-LA will initiate CAB-LA through the ongoing national pilot program. No study drug will be administered. Initiation of either PrEP method (i.e., receipt of prescription or injection) will be confirmed through clinic or pharmacy records, as well as information on reasons for non-initiation if applicable.
Investigators plan study follow-up visits at month 1 and month 2 following enrollment. Interviewer-administered questionnaires will be completed at the month 1 follow-up and the final follow-up visit (month 2). Questionnaires will assess study outcomes and associated social and behavioural measures to contextualize understanding of primary study outcomes. A subset of participants will complete in-depth qualitative interviews at month 1. Interviews will provide additional understanding of participant experiences with the intervention and experience using PrEP (if applicable).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice) | Experimental | Behavioral: My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice)The MyChoice intervention consists of PrEP shared decision-making counseling delivered by a trained counselor. It begins with a review of HIV risk in pregnancy/breastfeeding including discussion of population-specific risk factors which may apply to the participant. Next, the counselor presents HIV prevention options including CAB-LA, daily oral PrEP, and internal and external condoms (discussing attributes and potential advantages and disadvantages of each method). This is followed by a values clarification exercise to identify which features of the competing options matter most to the participant (product attributes and personal and interpersonal implications of each method). The counselor reviews information about these valued features for each offered method. This information and checks to understand and address any unmet participant decision support needs serve as the basis for structured deliberation to collaboratively identify participant preferred method(s). |
| Standard of care (control arm) | Active comparator | Behavioral: Standard of care (control arm)Participants randomized to the control arm will receive PrEP counseling as based on the current standard of care (SOC). The SOC counseling will be delivered by a trained study staff member. The SOC counselor PrEP counseling according to national guidelines. Control arm participants will receive comprehensive education on both the advantages and limitations of each PrEP method, including guidance on potential side effects. The SOC counselor will assess the woman's eligibility, willingness, and readiness to start using PrEP. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (11 listed)
- Age 18 or older
- Documented pregnancy by urine pregnancy test or physical exam
- Documented negative HIV status within the past three months
- Identified factor(s) for elevated risk for HIV acquisition per PrEP national eligibility guidelines
- Willingness to remain in the study site's catchment area over the course of study follow-up and to comply with visit schedule
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Positive HIV test at time of screening
- No identified HIV risk factors per national PrEP guidelines
- Risk for intimate partner violence or social harms as a result of participation, in the judgement of the study personnel
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice)My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice) is a counselor-delivered shared decision-making approach for pregnant women considering PrEP | Behavioural | My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice) |
| Standard of care (control arm)Standard of care (control arm) participants will receive comprehensive education on both the advantages and limitations of each PrEP method, including guidance on potential side effects. | Behavioural | Standard of care (control arm) |
Primary outcome
Acceptability of Intervention Measure Score
Time frame: enrollment, final follow up visit (Month 2)
Intervention acceptability will be defined as the extent to which participants perceive the intervention to be agreeable, palatable, or satisfactory. Acceptability will be assessed through participant self-report using a validated 4-item scale. This scale measures how agreeable and satisfactory women find the intervention (responses rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "Completely Disagree" to "Completely Agree"). Range is 1-5 and higher scores indicate a greater acceptability.
Intervention Appropriateness Measure Score
Time frame: enrollment, final follow up visit (Month 2)
Intervention appropriateness will be defined as the perceived relevance and usefulness of the intervention to support decision making about HIV prevention methods. Appropriateness will be assessed through self-report using a validated 4-item scale to measure women's perceptions of its relevance and usefulness (responses rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "Completely Disagree" to "Completely Agree"). Range is 1-5 and higher scores indicate a greater appropriateness.
5 secondary outcomes
Mean Number of Women Screened Weekly
Time frame: At screening
Proportion of Screened Eligible Women Enrolling in the study
Time frame: At the time of enrollment
Proportion of Enrolled Participants Returning for Follow-Up Visits
Time frame: 1-month follow-up, 2-month follow-up
Number of Days Taken to Achieve Enrollment Targets from the Date of Enrollment Initiation
Time frame: At the time of enrollment
Number of Days Taken to Achieve Retention Targets from the Date of the First Scheduled Follow-up Visit
Time frame: At the time of enrollment, 2-month follow-up
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 24 Jul 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41232107Saidi F, Welch S, Phanga T, Sulpizio C, Paile L, Ngo'ma D, Tsidya M, Chindebvu M, Nkhoma G, Nkhalamba L, Kaliati I, Mkochi N, Chakala H, Kumwenda W, Bula A, Winner P, Munthali T, Nyamaizi A, Keys J, Maman S, Pearce L, Golin C, Chi BH, Hill LM. Supporting Oral and Long-Acting HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis Decision-Making Among Pregnant Women (MyChoice Intervention): Protocol for 2 Pilot Randomized Controlled Trials. JMIR Res Protoc. 2025 Nov 13;14:e76442. doi: 10.2196/76442.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Deidentified individual data that supports the results will be shared beginning 9 to 36 months following publication provided the investigator who proposes to use the data has approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB), Independent Ethics Committee (IEC), or Research Ethics Board (REB), as applicable, and executes a data use/sharing agreement with UNC.
Related trials for HIV Prevention
Not yet recruiting
HealthMpowerment Korea: Pilot Testing the Cultural Adaptation of a Digital HIV Intervention for Men Who Have Sex With Men in South Korea
HIV Infections, HIV Prevention and Care
Not yet recruiting
HIV/STI/HCV Testing and Overdose Prevention Among Survivors of Sex Trafficking
HIV Testing, STI
Not yet recruiting
HC-HMP: Healthy Choices Implementation Trial
Alcohol Drinking, HIV Infections
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
NOTRE: Optimizing Long-Acting Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis and Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Interventions in Carceral Settings
HIV Infections, Opioid Use Disorder
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
Long-term Follow-up of Long-acting Cabotegravir (CAB LA) for PrEP (Pre-exposure Prophylaxis) in Participants at Risk of Acquiring HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus)
HIV Infections
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Lauren Hill, PhD,MSPH principal investigator
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing My Choice for HIV Prevention (MyChoice) in people with HIV Prevention, run by University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill at 1 site in Malawi.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 11 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Jul 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Malawi. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Acceptability of Intervention Measure Score (time frame: enrollment, final follow up visit (Month 2)). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06397690, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Jul 2025.