Comparative Effectiveness of Treatment Options for Genital Herpes Infection to Reduce Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes
NCT ID: NCT02986802
Last Updated: 2021-09-17
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
89132 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2017-03-14
2021-02-28
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Treating Genital Herpes Infection to Reduce Racial Disparities in the Risk of Severe Maternal Morbidity
NCT05429346
Herpevac Neonatal Substudy
NCT00138320
Safety of a Herpes Simplex Candidate Vaccine (gD2t) With MPL and Its Efficacy to Prevent Genital Herpes Disease
NCT00699764
Safety and Efficacy of 4 Investigational HSV 2 Vaccines in Adults With Recurrent Genital Herpes Caused by HSV 2
NCT04222985
Identification of Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV) Shedding in the Female Genital Tract of Pregnant and Nonpregnant Women by GeneXpert PCR, Routine PCR, and Culture
NCT01878383
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Genital herpes infection is prevalent, with a recent WHO estimation of 500 million people worldwide infected. Treating pregnant women with genital herpes infection, especially before the 3rd trimester, has been shown to reduce the risk of PTD and LBW, thus it can be an effective intervention to reduce PTD/LBW. However, the effectiveness and benefit of treating genital herpes to reduce PTD and LBW needs to be further demonstrated in order to be incorporated into the treatment decision making process. Currently, many pregnant women choose not to treat genital herpes due to a general aversion to taking medications during pregnancy for the safety of their fetuses, and a lack of demonstrated evidence of benefits. Paradoxically, the choice of no treatment for genital herpes may adversely impact fetal health, leading to PTD and LBW. Given that pregnant women frequently prefer no treatment, studies are urgently needed to establish the risk-benefit profile between treatment and no treatment for genital herpes infection in the context of improving fetal health, including the timing of treatment (before the 3rd trimester). This study is designed to provide clear evidence of treatment effectiveness in real-world clinical practice, and risk-benefit profiles to inform both treatment decisions by pregnant women and clinicians.
Study Aims:
This proposed comparative effectiveness study will address the following questions:
1. Does treating genital herpes infection in pregnant women reduce the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes including PTD or LBW? (treated vs. untreated)
2. Does the timing of the treatment during pregnancy influence the treatment effectiveness on reducing adverse pregnancy outcomes (PTD and LBW)? (head-to-head comparison of treatment timing: before the 3rd trimester vs. during the 3rd trimester).
3. Do other treatment metrics, including treatment duration, dosage, and compliance, impact treatment effectiveness in reducing the risk of PTD and LBW?
4. Does treatment effectiveness vary depending on the type (or severity) of underlying genital herpes infection? (e.g., treating symptomatic genital herpes infection vs. treating latent/asymptomatic genital herpes)
5. Does genital herpes infection in pregnancy, if untreated, increase the risk of PTD and LBW, compared to no genital herpes infection? (untreated vs. controls without genital herpes) In addition, this study is especially relevant in addressing racial disparities, given that minority pregnant women have higher rates of both genital herpes infection and PTD: 3 times the infection rate and 150% higher PTD rate among African-Americans compared to Whites. Thus, demonstrating the effectiveness of treating genital herpes in reducing PTD could lead to a reduction in the existing racial disparity in PTD rates.
Study Description Overall study design: The investigators will conduct a prospective cohort study with a two-stage design based on more than 90,000 pregnant KPNC members in real-world clinical practice. Due to the increased fetal risk of untreated genital herpes infection, randomizing pregnant women with the infection into treated and untreated groups presents ethical problems, thus is not feasible. Our innovative two-stage prospective cohort design, leveraging our large membership and comprehensive electronic medical record (EMR) data, is a robust alternative option for examining the comparative effectiveness of treating genital herpes infection in pregnant women to reduce PTD and LBW.
Comparators: Three comparisons will be made:
1. When assessing treatment effectiveness, women with the infection who choose not to receive treatment will serve as the comparator (untreated). This comparator is a frequently preferred treatment option chosen by pregnant women due to their reluctance to use medications during pregnancy, based on their predominant concerns for the safety of their developing fetus as well as a lack of evidence that treating genital herpes infection is beneficial to their fetus. This comparator will also make the comparison groups more comparable by controlling for confounding by indication.
2. When assessing the timing of treatment effectiveness (before vs. after the start of the 3rd trimester), those who receive treatment during the 3rd trimester will be used as the comparator. Using this comparator will allow a head-to-head comparison between the timing of the treatment.
3. When assessing the effect of choosing not to treat during pregnancy, women without an underlying genital herpes infection or receipt of any treatment will serve as the comparator (normal controls). This comparison will provide evidence of the increased risk of PTD and LBW if genital herpes infection is not treated during pregnancy.
Our comparators will allow us to control for confounding by indication (genital herpes, its type and severity). Our EMR contains extensive questions on risk factors, including lifestyle factors, for all 90,000 mother-infant dyads. Through the unique two-stage study design, investigators will collect additional information, through interviews, on a subsample of women that will further allow controlling for additional confounders. Multiple statistical methodologies, in accordance with PCORI's methodology standards, will be employed in the analytic plan (e.g., propensity scores, instrumental variable methods) to ensure compatibility between comparison groups.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Genital herpes treated before third trimester
Women with genital herpes receiving treatment before the 3rd trimester
No interventions assigned to this group
Genital herpes treated only during third trimester
Women with genital herpes receiving treatment during the 3rd trimester
No interventions assigned to this group
Genital herpes untreated
Women with untreated genital herpes
No interventions assigned to this group
Control group
Women (controls) with neither genital herpes nor treatment
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Pregnant women
Exclusion Criteria
* Non pregnant women
18 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
OTHER
Kaiser Permanente
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
De-Kun Li, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Kaiser Permanente
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Division of Research
Oakland, California, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
CN-16-2669
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.