Suchergebnisse

AbstractIntroductionKnowledge of HIV status relies on accurate HIV testing, and is the first step towards access to HIV treatment and prevention programmes. Globally, HIV‐status unawareness represents a significant challenge for achieving zero new HIV infections and deaths. In order to enhance knowledge of HIV status, the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends a testing strategy that includes the use of HIV‐specific antibody point‐of‐care tests (POCT). These POCTs do not detect acute HIV infection, the stage of disease when viral load is highest but HIV antibodies are undetectable. Complicating things further, in the presence of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) or post‐exposure prophylaxis (PEP), other currently available testing technologies, such as viral load detection for diagnosis of acute HIV infection, may yield false‐negative results. In this scoping review, we evaluate the evidence and discuss alternative HIV testing algorithms that may mitigate diagnostic dilemmas in the setting of increased utilization of ART for immediate treatment and prevention of HIV infection.DiscussionMissed acute HIV infection prevents people living with HIV (PLHIV) from accessing early treatment, increases likelihood of onward transmission, and allows for inappropriate initiation or continuation of PrEP, which may result in HIV drug resistance. While immediate ART is recommended for all PLHIV, studies have shown that starting ART in the setting of acute HIV infection may result in a delayed or complete absence of development of HIV‐specific antibodies, posing a diagnostic challenge that is particularly pertinent to resource‐limited, high HIV burden settings where HIV‐antibody POCTs are standard of care. Similarly, ART used as PrEP or PEP may supress HIV RNA viral load, complicating current HIV testing algorithms in resource‐wealthy settings where viral detection is included. As rollout of PrEP continues, HIV testing algorithms may need to be modified.ConclusionsWith increasing use of PrEP and ART in acute infection we anticipate diagnostic challenges using currently available HIV testing strategies. Research and surveillance are needed to determine the most appropriate assays and optimal testing algorithms that are accurate, affordable and sustainable.

AbstractIntroduction: The unchanged global HIV incidence may be related to ignoring acute HIV infection (AHI). This scoping review examines diagnostic, clinical, and public health implications of identifying and treating persons with AHI.Methods: We searched PubMed, in addition to hand‐review of key journals identifying research pertaining to AHI detection and treatment. We focused on the relative contribution of AHI to transmission and the diagnostic, clinical, and public health implications. We prioritized research from low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs) published in the last fifteen years.Results and Discussion: Extensive AHI research and limited routine AHI detection and treatment have begun in LMIC. Diagnostic challenges include ease‐of‐use, suitability for application and distribution in LMIC, and throughput for high‐volume testing. Risk score algorithms have been used in LMIC to screen for AHI among individuals with behavioural and clinical characteristics more often associated with AHI. However, algorithms have not been implemented outside research settings. From a clinical perspective, there are substantial immunological and virological benefits to identifying and treating persons with AHI – evading the irreversible damage to host immune systems and seeding of viral reservoirs that occurs during untreated acute infection. The therapeutic benefits require rapid initiation of antiretrovirals, a logistical challenge in the absence of point‐of‐care testing. From a public health perspective, AHI diagnosis and treatment is critical to: decrease transmission via viral load reduction and behavioural interventions; improve pre‐exposure prophylaxis outcomes by avoiding treatment initiation for HIV‐seronegative persons with AHI; and, enhance partner services via notification for persons recently exposed or likely transmitting.Conclusions: There are undeniable clinical and public health benefits to AHI detection and treatment, but also substantial diagnostic and logistical barriers to implementation and scale‐up. Effective early ART initiation may be critical for HIV eradication efforts, but widespread use in LMIC requires simple and accurate diagnostic tools. Implementation research is critical to facilitate sustainable integration of AHI detection and treatment into existing health systems and will be essential for prospective evaluation of testing algorithms, point‐of‐care diagnostics, and efficacious and effective first‐line regimens.

AbstractIntroductionHIV diagnosis is the necessary first step towards HIV care initiation, yet many persons living with HIV (PLWH) remain undiagnosed. Employing multiple HIV testing strategies in tandem could increase HIV detection and promote linkage to care. We aimed to assess an intervention to improve HIV detection within socio‐sexual networks of PLWH in two sexually transmitted infections (STI) clinics in Lilongwe, Malawi.MethodsWe conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate an intervention combining acute HIV infection (AHI) screening, contract partner notification and social contact referral versus the Malawian standard of care: serial rapid serological HIV tests and passive partner referral. Enrolment occurred between 2015 and 2019. HIV‐seropositive persons (two positive rapid tests) were randomized to the trial arms and HIV‐seronegative (one negative rapid test) and ‐serodiscordant (one positive test followed by a negative confirmatory test) persons were screened for AHI with HIV RNA testing. Those found to have AHI were offered enrolment into the intervention arm. Our primary outcome of interest was the number of new HIV diagnoses made per index participant within participants' sexual and social networks. We also calculated total persons, sexual partners and PLWH (including those previously diagnosed) referred per index participant.ResultsA total of 1230 HIV‐seropositive persons were randomized to the control arm, and 561 to the intervention arm. Another 12,713 HIV‐seronegative or ‐serodiscordant persons underwent AHI screening, resulting in 136 AHI cases, of whom 94 enrolled into the intervention arm. The intervention increased the number of new HIV diagnoses made per index participant versus the control (ratio: 1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2 to 3.1). The intervention also increased the numbers of persons (ratio: 2.5; 95% CI: 2.0 to 3.2), sexual partners (ratio: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.4 to 2.0) and PLWH (ratio: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.7 to 3.2) referred per index participant.ConclusionsCombining three distinct HIV testing and referral strategies increased the detection of previously undiagnosed HIV infections within the socio‐sexual networks of PLWH seeking STI care. Combination HIV detection strategies that leverage AHI screening and socio‐sexual contact networks offer a novel and efficacious approach to increasing HIV status awareness.