Cover Image
close this bookUNAIDS-Sponsored Regional Workshops to Discuss Ethical Issues in Preventive HIV Vaccine Trials (UNAIDS, 2000, 52 p.)
close this folderWORKSHOP REPORTS
close this folderBANGKOK, THAILAND, 20-22 APRIL, 1998
View the document1. Collaboration in Phase I, II and III Trials
View the document2. Community
View the document3. Ethical and Scientific Review
View the document4. Intellectual Property
View the document5. Control Arm in Trials
View the document6. Informed Consent
View the document7. Gender, Pregnancy and Breast-Feeding
View the document8. Children
View the document9. Protection from Discrimination
View the document10. Vaccine-Induced HIV-Seropositivity
View the document11. Counselling
View the document12. Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP)
View the document13. Treatment and Care
View the document14. Compensation
View the document15. Availability of Vaccine

12. Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP)

Consensus:

Post-exposure prophylaxis should be offered to trial participants to the degree that it has become the standard practice in the host country.

Discussion:

Participants need to be informed about what actions may be taken during the study with respect to post-exposure prophylaxis, regardless of whether or not it is provided without charge.

A major question is who would bear the cost. If the government is funding PEP for the public, then it would be provided through the same mechanism for study participants. If the government is not funding PEP, then they would be left to cover the cost privately.

Those who receive PEP might still be followed in a trial and provide valuable data.

Providing PEP to study participants that is not available to the general population may be an inappropriate inducement to volunteer in the trial.