Sunil Suhas Solomon1, Shruti H Mehta2, Allison M McFall2, Aylur K Srikrishnan3, Shanmugam Saravanan3, Oliver Laeyendecker4, Pachamuthu Balakrishnan3, David D Celentano2, Suniti Solomon3, Gregory M Lucas5. 1. Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: sss@jhmi.edu. 2. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. YR Gaitonde Centre for AIDS Research and Education, Chennai, India. 4. Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 5. Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:HIV incidence is the best measure of treatment-programme effectiveness, but its measurement is difficult and expensive. The concept of community viral load as a modifiable driver of new HIV infections has attracted substantial attention. We set out to compare several measures of community viral load and antiretroviral therapy (ART) coverage as correlates of HIV incidence in high-risk populations. METHODS: We analysed data from a sample of people who inject drugs and men who have sex with men, who were participants of the baseline assessment of a cluster-randomised trial in progress across 22 cities in India (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01686750). We recruited the study population by use of respondent-driven sampling and did the baseline assessment at 27 community-based sites (12 for men who have sex with men and 15 for people who inject drugs). We estimated HIV incidence with a multiassay algorithm and calculated five community-based measures of HIV control: mean log10 HIV RNA in participants with HIV in a community either engaged in care (in-care viral load), aware of their status but not necessarily in care (aware viral load), or all HIV-positive individuals whether they were aware, in care, or not (population viral load); participants with HIV in a community with HIV RNA more than 150 copies per mL (prevalence of viraemia); and the proportion of participants with HIV who self-reported ART use in the previous 30 days (population ART coverage). All participants were tested for HIV, with additional testing in HIV-positive individuals. We assessed correlations between the measures and HIV incidence with Spearman correlation coefficients and linear regression analysis. FINDINGS: Between Oct 1, 2012, and Dec 19, 2013, we recruited 26,503 participants, 12,022 men who have sex with men and 14,481 people who inject drugs. Median incidence of HIV was 0·87% (IQR 0·40-1·17) in men who have sex with men and 1·43% (0·60-4·00) in people who inject drugs. Prevalence of viraemia was more strongly correlated with HIV incidence (correlation 0·81, 95% CI 0·62-0·91; p<0·0001) than all other measures, although correlation was significant with aware viral load (0·59, 0·27-0·79; p=0·001), population viral load (0·51, 0·16-0·74; p=0·007), and population ART coverage (-0·54, -0·76 to -0·20; p=0·004). In-care viral load was not correlated with HIV incidence (0·29, -0·10 to 0·60; p=0·14). With regression analysis, we estimated that to reduce HIV incidence by 1 percentage point in a community, prevalence of viraemia would need to be reduced by 4·34%, and ART use in HIV-positive individuals would need to increase by 19·5%. INTERPRETATION:Prevalence of viraemia had the strongest correlation with HIV incidence in this sample and might be a useful measure of the effectiveness of a treatment programme. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, Elton John AIDS Foundation.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: HIV incidence is the best measure of treatment-programme effectiveness, but its measurement is difficult and expensive. The concept of community viral load as a modifiable driver of new HIV infections has attracted substantial attention. We set out to compare several measures of community viral load and antiretroviral therapy (ART) coverage as correlates of HIV incidence in high-risk populations. METHODS: We analysed data from a sample of people who inject drugs and men who have sex with men, who were participants of the baseline assessment of a cluster-randomised trial in progress across 22 cities in India (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01686750). We recruited the study population by use of respondent-driven sampling and did the baseline assessment at 27 community-based sites (12 for men who have sex with men and 15 for people who inject drugs). We estimated HIV incidence with a multiassay algorithm and calculated five community-based measures of HIV control: mean log10 HIV RNA in participants with HIV in a community either engaged in care (in-care viral load), aware of their status but not necessarily in care (aware viral load), or all HIV-positive individuals whether they were aware, in care, or not (population viral load); participants with HIV in a community with HIV RNA more than 150 copies per mL (prevalence of viraemia); and the proportion of participants with HIV who self-reported ART use in the previous 30 days (population ART coverage). All participants were tested for HIV, with additional testing in HIV-positive individuals. We assessed correlations between the measures and HIV incidence with Spearman correlation coefficients and linear regression analysis. FINDINGS: Between Oct 1, 2012, and Dec 19, 2013, we recruited 26,503 participants, 12,022 men who have sex with men and 14,481 people who inject drugs. Median incidence of HIV was 0·87% (IQR 0·40-1·17) in men who have sex with men and 1·43% (0·60-4·00) in people who inject drugs. Prevalence of viraemia was more strongly correlated with HIV incidence (correlation 0·81, 95% CI 0·62-0·91; p<0·0001) than all other measures, although correlation was significant with aware viral load (0·59, 0·27-0·79; p=0·001), population viral load (0·51, 0·16-0·74; p=0·007), and population ART coverage (-0·54, -0·76 to -0·20; p=0·004). In-care viral load was not correlated with HIV incidence (0·29, -0·10 to 0·60; p=0·14). With regression analysis, we estimated that to reduce HIV incidence by 1 percentage point in a community, prevalence of viraemia would need to be reduced by 4·34%, and ART use in HIV-positive individuals would need to increase by 19·5%. INTERPRETATION: Prevalence of viraemia had the strongest correlation with HIV incidence in this sample and might be a useful measure of the effectiveness of a treatment programme. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, Elton John AIDS Foundation.
Authors: Amanda D Castel; Montina Befus; Sarah Willis; Angelique Griffin; Tiffany West; Shannon Hader; Alan E Greenberg Journal: AIDS Date: 2012-01-28 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Jessica M Fogel; Lei Wang; Teresa L Parsons; San-San Ou; Estelle Piwowar-Manning; Ying Chen; Victor O Mudhune; Mina C Hosseinipour; Johnstone Kumwenda; James G Hakim; Suwat Chariyalertsak; Ravindre Panchia; Ian Sanne; Nagalingeswaran Kumarasamy; Beatriz Grinsztejn; Joseph Makhema; Jose Pilotto; Breno R Santos; Kenneth H Mayer; Marybeth McCauley; Theresa Gamble; Namandjé N Bumpus; Craig W Hendrix; Myron S Cohen; Susan H Eshleman Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Sunil S Solomon; Shruti H Mehta; Aylur K Srikrishnan; Canjeevaram K Vasudevan; Allison M Mcfall; Pachamuthu Balakrishnan; Santhanam Anand; Panneerselvam Nandagopal; Elizabeth L Ogburn; Oliver Laeyendecker; Gregory M Lucas; Suniti Solomon; David D Celentano Journal: AIDS Date: 2015-03-27 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Julio S G Montaner; Viviane D Lima; Rolando Barrios; Benita Yip; Evan Wood; Thomas Kerr; Kate Shannon; P Richard Harrigan; Robert S Hogg; Patricia Daly; Perry Kendall Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-07-16 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Vivek Jain; Teri Liegler; Jane Kabami; Gabriel Chamie; Tamara D Clark; Douglas Black; Elvin H Geng; Dalsone Kwarisiima; Joseph K Wong; Mohamed Abdel-Mohsen; Nitin Sonawane; Francesca T Aweeka; Harsha Thirumurthy; Maya L Petersen; Edwin D Charlebois; Moses R Kamya; Diane V Havlir Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2012-12-12 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Moupali Das; Priscilla Lee Chu; Glenn-Milo Santos; Susan Scheer; Eric Vittinghoff; Willi McFarland; Grant N Colfax Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-06-10 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Oliver Laeyendecker; Michal Kulich; Deborah Donnell; Arnošt Komárek; Marek Omelka; Caroline E Mullis; Greg Szekeres; Estelle Piwowar-Manning; Agnes Fiamma; Ronald H Gray; Tom Lutalo; Charles S Morrison; Robert A Salata; Tsungai Chipato; Connie Celum; Erin M Kahle; Taha E Taha; Newton I Kumwenda; Quarraisha Abdool Karim; Vivek Naranbhai; Jairam R Lingappa; Michael D Sweat; Thomas Coates; Susan H Eshleman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-11-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Pooyan Kazemian; Sydney Costantini; Anne M Neilan; Stephen C Resch; Rochelle P Walensky; Milton C Weinstein; Kenneth A Freedberg Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2020-06-08 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Ashly E Jordan; David C Perlman; Charles M Cleland; Katarzyna Wyka; Bruce R Schackman; Denis Nash Journal: J Clin Virol Date: 2020-01-27 Impact factor: 3.168
Authors: Andrew Tomita; Alain M Vandormael; Till Bärnighausen; Tulio de Oliveira; Frank Tanser Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Javier A Cepeda; Sunil S Solomon; Aylur K Srikrishnan; Allison M McFall; Muniratnam Suresh Kumar; Canjeevaram K Vasudevan; Santhanam Anand; David D Celentano; Gregory M Lucas; Shruti H Mehta Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Ashly E Jordan; Charles M Cleland; Bruce R Schackman; Katarzyna Wyka; David C Perlman; Denis Nash Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2020-09-02 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Alessandra Anna Secco; Hana Akselrod; Jonathan Czeresnia; Matthew Levy; Morgan Byrne; Anne Monroe; Jose Lucar; Michael Horberg; Amanda Derryck Castel; Rupali Doshi; Heather Rivasplata; Leah Squires; David Parenti; Debra Benator Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2020-01-06 Impact factor: 3.519