HIV and dyadic intervention: an interdependence and communal coping analysis.

BACKGROUND: The most common form of HIV transmission in sub-Saharan Africa is heterosexual sex between two partners. While most HIV prevention interventions are aimed at the individual, there is mounting evidence of the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of dyadic interventions. However, the mechanisms through which dyadic-level interventions achieve success remain little explored. We address this gap by using Lewis et al's interdependence model of couple communal coping and behaviour change to analyse data from partners participating in an HIV prevention trial in Uganda and Zambia. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a comparative qualitative study using in-depth interviews. Thirty-three interviews were conducted in total; ten with couples and twenty-three with staff members at the two sites. The Ugandan site recruited a sero-discordant couple cohort and the Zambian site recruited women alone. Spouses' transformation of motivation is strong where couples are recruited and both partners stand to gain considerably by participating in the research; it is weaker where this is not the case. As such, coping mechanisms differ in the two sites; among sero-discordant couples in Uganda, communal coping is evidenced through joint consent to participate, regular couple counselling and workshops, sharing of HIV test results, and strong spousal support for adherence and retention. By contrast, coping at the Zambian site is predominantly left to the individual woman and occurs against a backdrop of mutual mistrust and male disenfranchisement. We discuss these findings in light of practical and ethical considerations of recruiting couples to HIV research. CONCLUSIONS: We argue for the need to consider the broader context within which behaviour change occurs and propose that future dyadic research be situated within the framework of the 'risk environment'

A phase II study of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab in the treatment of metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinomas

Background. Esophageal and gastric cancers often present at an advanced stage. Systemic chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment, but survival with current regimens remains poor. We evaluated the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of the combination capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab in the treatment of metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinomas. Methods. Thirty-seven patients with metastatic or unresectable gastric/gastroesophageal junction tumors were enrolled and treated with capecitabine 850 mg/m2 BID on days 1-14, and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 with bevacizumab 15 mg/kg on day 1 of a 21day cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included response rate (RR) and overall survival (OS). Neuropilin-1 (NRP1) and -2 (NRP2) mRNA expression was evaluated in archived tumor. Results. Thirty-five patients were evaluable for efficacy. Median PFS was 7.2 months; median OS was 10.8 months. RR was estimated at 51.4%. The regimen was tolerable with expected drug class-related toxicities. NRP2 mRNA levels significantly correlated with PFS (p 0.042) and showed a trend toward significance with OS (p 0.051). Nonsignificant trends for NRP1 were noted for higher expression levels and worse outcome. Conclusions. Bevacizumab can be given safely with chemotherapy in patients with metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinomas. The combination of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, plus bevacizumab has activity comparable to other bevacizumab-containing regimens in metastatic gastroesophageal cancer. © AlphaMed Press 2013.link_to_subscribed_fulltex