American Journal of Drug Delivery

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 7–20

Potential use of vaginal rings for prevention of heterosexual transmission of HIV

A controlled-release strategy for HIV microbicides
  • A. David Woolfson
  • R. Karl Malcolm
  • Clare F. Toner
  • Ryan J. Morrow
  • Deborah Lowry
  • Asha Jamil
  • Stephen D. McCullagh
Leading Article

Abstract

It is estimated that >80% of new HIV infections are contracted via heterosexual intercourse. Although a number of preventative strategies have been and are being pursued, the ultimate prevention tool–a safe, inexpensive, and effective vaccine–is nowhere on the horizon despite huge efforts over the past 2 decades. There is growing optimism that a vaginally applied HIV microbicide might be available for women to use within the next 5 years. It is likely that first-generation vaginal microbicides will make use of traditional semi-solid formulations since these are already used for vaginal administration of pharmaceutical substances. However, a number of drawbacks are associated with such formulations that may limit their clinical effectiveness as vaginal microbicide delivery vehicles.

In this article, the potential for providing controlled vaginal delivery of HIV microbicides using established vaginal ring technology is considered in detail for the first time. In particular, the article discusses and evaluates the pros and cons associated with prolonged continuous vaginal administration of HIV microbicides, reviews and compares the scientific literature with respect to user acceptability of vaginal semi-solids and rings, and then provides some in vitro data describing the zero-order controlled release of a number of lead candidate non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors from silicone elastomer vaginal rings.

References

  1. 1.
    The Rockfeiler Foundation. Mobilization for microbicides: the decisive decade [online]. Available from URL: http://www.eldis.org/static/DOC10041.htm [Accessed 2006 Jan 25]
  2. 2.
    AIDS Epidemic Update 2004, Joint United Nations Programme of HIV/AIDS [online]. Available from URL: http://www.unaids.org/wad2004/report.html [Accessed 2006 Jan 25]
  3. 3.
    World Health Report 2004, World Health Organization [online]. Available from URL: http://www.who.int/whr/en/ [Accessed 2006 Jan 25]
  4. 4.
    AIDSMAP, The Modes of Transmission [online]. Available from URL: http://www.aidsmap.com/en/docs/3B921EEB-25D5-4699-A195-18D848A2C92D.asp [Accessed 2006 Jan 25]
  5. 5.
    Royce RA, Sena A, Cates W, et al. Sexual transmission of HIV. N Engl J Med 1997; 336: 1072–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mastro TD, Satten GA, Nopkesorn T, et al. Probability of female-to-male transmission of HIV-1 in Thailand. Lancet 1994; 343: 204–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nicolosi A, Correa Leite ML, Musicco M, et al. The efficiency of male-to-female and female-to-male sexual transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus: a study of 730 stable couples. Italian Study Group on HIV Heterosexual Transmission. Epidemiology 1994; 5: 570–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Padian NS, Shiboski SC, Jewell NP. Female-to-male transmission of human immunodeficiency virus. JAMA 1991; 266: 1664–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Padian NS, Shiboski SC, Glass SO, et al. Heterosexual transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in northern California: results from a ten-year study. Am J Epidemiol 1997; 146: 350–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    European Study Group on Heterosexual Transmission of HIV, comparison of female-to-male and male-to-female transmission of HIV in 563 stable couples. BMJ 1992; 304: 809–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Peterman TA, Stoneburner RL, Allen JR, et al. Risk of human immunodeficiency virus transmission from heterosexual adults with transfusion-associated infections. JAMA 1988; 259: 55–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Owen DH, Katz DF. A vaginal fluid simulant. Contraception 1999; 59: 91–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Polsky B, Baron PA, Gold JW, et al. In vitro inactivation of HIV-1 by contraceptive sponge containing nonoxynol-9 [letter]. Lancet 1988; I: 1456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Miller CJ, Alexander NJ, Gettie A, et al. The effect of contraceptives containing nonoxynol-9 on the genital transmission of simian immunodeficiency virus in rhesus macaques. Fertil Steril 1992; 57: 1126–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li JZ, Mack EC, Levy JA. Virucidal efficacy of soap and water against human immunodeficiency virus in genital secretions. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003; 47: 3321–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Niruthisard S, Roddy RE, Chutivongse S. The effects of frequent nonoxynol-9 use on the vaginal and cervical mucosa. Sex Transm Dis 1991; 18: 176–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Van Damme L, Ramjee G, Alary M, et al. COL-1492 study group. Effectiveness of COL-1492, a nonoxynol-9 vaginal gel, on HIV-1 transmission in female sex workers: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2002; 360: 971–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dayal MB, Wheeler J, Williams CJ, et al. Disruption of the upper female reproductive tract epithelium by nonoxynol-9. Contraception 2003; 68: 273–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Woolfson AD, Malcolm RK, Gallagher R. Drug delivery by the intravaginal route. Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst 2000; 17: 509–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Duncan GW. Medicated devices and methods. US Patent 3,545,439, 1970Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dziuk PJ, Cook B. Passage of steroids through silicone rubber. Endocrinology 1966; 78: 208–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Malcolm K, Woolfson D, Russell J, et al. In vitro release of nonoxynol-9 from silicone matrix intravaginal rings. J Control Release 2003; 91: 355–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Malcolm K, Woolfson D. Blocking the heterosexual transmission of HIV: intravaginal rings for the controlled delivery of topical microbicides. Drug Del Syst Sci 2001; 1: 117–21Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Smith RJ, Bodine EN, Wilson DP, et al. Evaluating the potential impact of vaginal microbicides to reduce the risk of acquiring HIV in female sex workers. AIDS 2005; 19: 413–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fu H, Darroch JE, Haas T, et al. Contraceptive failure rates: new estimates from the 1995 national survey of family growth. Fam Plann Perspect 1999; 31: 56–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hillard PJ. Oral contraception non-compliance: the extent of the problem. Adv Contracept 1992; 8Suppl. 1: 13–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dieben TOM, Roumen FJME, Apter D. Efficacy, cycle control, and user acceptability of a novel combined contraceptive vaginal ring. Obstets Gynecol 2002; 100: 585–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Brache V, Alvarez-Sanchez F, Faundes A, et al. Progestin-only contraceptive rings. Steroids 2000; 65: 687–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ayton RA, Darling GM, Murkies AL, et al. A comparative study of safety and efficacy of continuous low dose oestradiol released from a vaginal ring compared with conjugated equine oestrogen vaginal cream in the treatment of postmenopausal urogenital atrophy. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 103: 351–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Barentsen R, van de Weijer P, Schram J. Continuous low dose estradiol released from a vaginal ring versus estriol vaginal cream for urogenital atrophy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1997; 71: 73–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Roumen FJME, Apter D, Mulders TMT, et al. Efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of a novel contraceptive vaginal ring releasing etonogestrel and ethinyl oestradiol. Hum Reprod 2001; 16: 469–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Roumen F, Dieben T, Assendorp R, et al. The clinical acceptability of a non-medicated vaginal ring. Contraception 1990; 42: 201–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vartiainen J, Wahlstrom T, Nilsson CG. Effects and acceptability of a new 17 betaoestradiol-releasing vaginal ring in the treatment of postmenopausal complaints. Maturitas 1993; 17: 129–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Roumen FJ, Dieben TO. Clinical acceptability of an ethylene-vinyl-acetate nonmedicated vaginal ring. Contraception 1999; 59: 59–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Novak A, de la Loge C, Abetz L, et al. The combined contraceptive vaginal ring, NuvaRing®: an international study of user acceptability. Contraception 2003; 67: 187–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Casper F, Petri E. Local treatment of urogenital atrophy with an estradiol-releasing vaginal ring: a comparative and a placebo-controlled multicenter study. Vaginal Ring Study Group. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 1999; 10: 171–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weisberg E, Fraser IS, Mishell DR, et al. The acceptability of a combined oestrogen/progestogen contraceptive vaginal ring. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1995; 50: 605–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Faundes A, Hardy E, Reyes C, et al. Acceptability of the contraceptive vaginal ring by rural and urban population in two Latin American countries. Contraception 1981; 24: 393–414PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Nachtigall LE. Clinical trial of the estradiol vaginal ring in the US. Maturitas 1995; 22: S43–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Malcolm RK, Woolfson AD, Talion P, et al. Influence of silicone elastomer solubility and diffusivity on the in vitro release of drugs from intravaginal rings. J Control Release 2003; 90: 355–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Woolfson AD, Elliott GRE, Cilligan CA, et al. Design of an intravaginal ring for the controlled release of 17β-estradiol as its 3-acetate ester. J Control Release 1999; 61: 319–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Woolfson AD, Malcolm RK, Gallagher RJ. Design of a silicone reservoir intravaginal ring for the delivery of oxybutynin. J Control Release 2003; 91: 465–76PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Barnard J, Borkow G, Parniak MA. The thiocarboxanilide nonnucleoside UC781 is a tight-binding inhibitor of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase. Biochemistry 1997; 36: 7786–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Di Fabio S, Van Rooey J, Giannini G, et al. Inhibition of vaginal transmission of HIV-1 in hu-SCID mice by the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor TMC120 in a gel formulation. AIDS 2003; 25: 1597–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Borkow G, Barnard J, Nguyen TM, et al. Chemical barriers to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection: retrovirucidal activity of UC781, a thiocarboxanilide nonnucleoside inhibitor of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase. J Virol 1997; 71: 3023–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Borkow G, Salomon H, Wainberg MA, et al. Attenuated infectivity of HIV type 1 from epithelial cells pretreated with a tight-binding nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses 2002; 18: 711–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Parniak MA. Nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors as anti-HIV-1 microbicides [abstract]. AIDS 2001; 15: S56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Balzarini J, Naesens L, Verbeken E, et al. Preclinical studies on thiocarboxanilide UC-781 as a virucidal agent. AIDS 1998; 12: 1129–38PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zussman A, Lara L, Lara HH, et al. Blocking of cell-free and cell-associated HIV-1 transmission through human cervix organ culture with UC781. AIDS 2003; 17: 653–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Damian F, Blaton N, Naesens L, et al. Physicochemical characterization of solid dispersions of the antiviral agent UC-781 with polyethylene glycol 6000 and Gelucire 44/14. Eur J Pharm Sci 2000; 10: 311–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Herrewege YV, Michiels J, Van Roey J, et al. In vitro evaluation of nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors UC-781 and TMC120-R147681 as human immunodeficiency virus microbicides. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004; 48: 337–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Herrewege YV, Vanham G, Michiels J, et al. A series of diaryltriazines and diarylpyrimidines are highly potent nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors with possible applications as microbicides. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004; 48: 3684–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Chien YW. Novel drug delivery systems. 2nd ed. Drugs and the pharmaceutical sciences. Vol 50. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1992: 47–50Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Owen DH, Katz DF. A vaginal fluid simulant. Contraception 1999; 59: 91–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Chia Se, Tay SK, Lim ST. What constitutes a normal seminal fluid? Semen parameters of 243 fertile men. Hum Reprod 1998; 13: 3394–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Harrigan PR, Hogg RS, Dong WW, et al. Predictors of HIV drug-resistance mutations in a large antiretroviral-naive cohort initiating triple antiretroviral therapy. J Infect Dis 2005; 191: 339–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. David Woolfson
    • 1
  • R. Karl Malcolm
    • 1
  • Clare F. Toner
    • 1
  • Ryan J. Morrow
    • 1
  • Deborah Lowry
    • 1
  • Asha Jamil
    • 1
  • Stephen D. McCullagh
    • 1
  1. 1.School of PharmacyQueen’s University Belfast, Medical Biology CentreBelfastUK

Personalised recommendations