Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Expanding Harm Reduction and Antiretroviral Therapy in a Mixed HIV Epidemic: A Modeling Analysis for Ukraine

A cost-effectiveness study by Sabina Alistar and colleagues evaluates the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of different levels of investment in methadone, ART, or both, in the mixed HIV epidemic in Ukraine

The perfect storm: incarceration and the high-risk environment perpetuating transmission of HIV, hepatitis C virus, and tuberculosis in Eastern Europe and Central Asia.

Despite global reductions in HIV incidence and mortality, the 15 UNAIDS-designated countries of Eastern Europe and Central Asia (EECA) that gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991 constitute the only region where both continue to rise. HIV transmission in EECA is fuelled primarily by injection of opioids, with harsh criminalisation of drug use that has resulted in extraordinarily high levels of incarceration. Consequently, people who inject drugs, including those with HIV, hepatitis C virus, and tuberculosis, are concentrated within prisons. Evidence-based primary and secondary prevention of HIV using opioid agonist therapies such as methadone and buprenorphine is available in prisons in only a handful of EECA countries (methadone or buprenorphine in five countries and needle and syringe programmes in three countries), with none of them meeting recommended coverage levels. Similarly, antiretroviral therapy coverage, especially among people who inject drugs, is markedly under-scaled. Russia completely bans opioid agonist therapies and does not support needle and syringe programmes-with neither available in prisons-despite the country's high incarceration rate and having the largest burden of people with HIV who inject drugs in the region. Mathematical modelling for Ukraine suggests that high levels of incarceration in EECA countries facilitate HIV transmission among people who inject drugs, with 28-55% of all new HIV infections over the next 15 years predicted to be attributable to heightened HIV transmission risk among currently or previously incarcerated people who inject drugs. Scaling up of opioid agonist therapies within prisons and maintaining treatment after release would yield the greatest HIV transmission reduction in people who inject drugs. Additional analyses also suggest that at least 6% of all incident tuberculosis cases, and 75% of incident tuberculosis cases in people who inject drugs are due to incarceration. Interventions that reduce incarceration itself and effectively intervene with prisoners to screen, diagnose, and treat addiction and HIV, hepatitis C virus, and tuberculosis are urgently needed to stem the multiple overlapping epidemics concentrated in prisons

A scalable, integrated intervention to engage people who inject drugs in HIV care and medication-assisted treatment (HPTN 074): a randomised, controlled phase 3 feasibility and efficacy study.

BackgroundPeople who inject drugs (PWID) have a high incidence of HIV, little access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) and medication-assisted treatment (MAT), and high mortality. We aimed to assess the feasibility of a future controlled trial based on the incidence of HIV, enrolment, retention, and uptake of the intervention, and the efficacy of an integrated and flexible intervention on ART use, viral suppression, and MAT use.MethodsThis randomised, controlled vanguard study was run in Kyiv, Ukraine (one community site), Thai Nguyen, Vietnam (two district health centre sites), and Jakarta, Indonesia (one hospital site). PWID who were HIV infected (index participants) and non-infected injection partners were recruited as PWID network units and were eligible for screening if they were aged 18-45 years (updated to 18-60 years 8 months into study), and active injection drug users. Further eligibility criteria for index participants included a viral load of 1000 copies per mL or higher, willingness and ability to recruit at least one injection partner who would be willing to participate. Index participants were randomly assigned via a computer generated sequence accessed through a secure web portal (3:1) to standard of care or intervention, stratified by site. Masking of assignment was not possible due to the nature of intervention. The intervention comprised systems navigation, psychosocial counselling, and ART at any CD4 count. Local ART and MAT services were used. Participants were followed up for 12-24 months. The primary objective was to assess the feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial. To achieve this aim we looked at the following endpoints: HIV incidence among injection partners in the standard of care group, and enrolment and retention of HIV-infected PWID and their injection partners and the uptake of the integrated intervention. The study was also designed to assess the feasibility, barriers, and uptake of the integrated intervention. Endpoints were assessed in a modified intention-to-treat popualtion after exclusion of ineligible participants. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02935296, and is active but not recruiting new participants.FindingsBetween Feb 5, 2015, and June 3, 2016, 3343 potential index participants were screened, of whom 502 (15%) were eligible and enrolled. 1171 injection partners were referred, and 806 (69%) were eligible and enrolled. Index participants were randomly assigned to intervention (126 [25%]) and standard of care (376 [75%]) groups. At week 52, most living index participants (389 [86%] of 451) and partners (567 [80%] of 710) were retained, and self-reported ART use was higher among index participants in the intervention group than those in the standard of care group (probability ratio [PR] 1·7, 95% CI 1·4-1·9). Viral suppression was also higher in the intervention group than in the standard of care group (PR 1·7, 95% CI 1·3-2·2). Index participants in the intervention group reported more MAT use at 52 weeks than those in the standard of care group (PR 1·7, 95% CI 1·3-2·2). Seven incident HIV infections occurred, and all in injection partners in the standard of care group (intervention incidence 0·0 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 0·0-1·7; standard of care incidence 1·0 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 0·4-2·1; incidence rate difference -1·0 per 100 person-years, 95% CI -2·1 to 1·1). No severe adverse events due to the intervention were recorded.InterpretationThis vanguard study provides evidence that a flexible, scalable intervention increases ART and MAT use and reduces mortality among PWID. The low incidence of HIV in both groups impedes a future randomised, controlled trial, but given the strength of the effect of the intervention, its implementation among HIV-infected PWID should be considered.FundingUS National Institutes of Health

A scalable, integrated intervention to engage people who inject drugs in HIV care and medication-assisted treatment (HPTN 074): a randomised, controlled phase 3 feasibility and efficacy study.

BackgroundPeople who inject drugs (PWID) have a high incidence of HIV, little access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) and medication-assisted treatment (MAT), and high mortality. We aimed to assess the feasibility of a future controlled trial based on the incidence of HIV, enrolment, retention, and uptake of the intervention, and the efficacy of an integrated and flexible intervention on ART use, viral suppression, and MAT use.MethodsThis randomised, controlled vanguard study was run in Kyiv, Ukraine (one community site), Thai Nguyen, Vietnam (two district health centre sites), and Jakarta, Indonesia (one hospital site). PWID who were HIV infected (index participants) and non-infected injection partners were recruited as PWID network units and were eligible for screening if they were aged 18-45 years (updated to 18-60 years 8 months into study), and active injection drug users. Further eligibility criteria for index participants included a viral load of 1000 copies per mL or higher, willingness and ability to recruit at least one injection partner who would be willing to participate. Index participants were randomly assigned via a computer generated sequence accessed through a secure web portal (3:1) to standard of care or intervention, stratified by site. Masking of assignment was not possible due to the nature of intervention. The intervention comprised systems navigation, psychosocial counselling, and ART at any CD4 count. Local ART and MAT services were used. Participants were followed up for 12-24 months. The primary objective was to assess the feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial. To achieve this aim we looked at the following endpoints: HIV incidence among injection partners in the standard of care group, and enrolment and retention of HIV-infected PWID and their injection partners and the uptake of the integrated intervention. The study was also designed to assess the feasibility, barriers, and uptake of the integrated intervention. Endpoints were assessed in a modified intention-to-treat popualtion after exclusion of ineligible participants. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02935296, and is active but not recruiting new participants.FindingsBetween Feb 5, 2015, and June 3, 2016, 3343 potential index participants were screened, of whom 502 (15%) were eligible and enrolled. 1171 injection partners were referred, and 806 (69%) were eligible and enrolled. Index participants were randomly assigned to intervention (126 [25%]) and standard of care (376 [75%]) groups. At week 52, most living index participants (389 [86%] of 451) and partners (567 [80%] of 710) were retained, and self-reported ART use was higher among index participants in the intervention group than those in the standard of care group (probability ratio [PR] 1·7, 95% CI 1·4-1·9). Viral suppression was also higher in the intervention group than in the standard of care group (PR 1·7, 95% CI 1·3-2·2). Index participants in the intervention group reported more MAT use at 52 weeks than those in the standard of care group (PR 1·7, 95% CI 1·3-2·2). Seven incident HIV infections occurred, and all in injection partners in the standard of care group (intervention incidence 0·0 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 0·0-1·7; standard of care incidence 1·0 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 0·4-2·1; incidence rate difference -1·0 per 100 person-years, 95% CI -2·1 to 1·1). No severe adverse events due to the intervention were recorded.InterpretationThis vanguard study provides evidence that a flexible, scalable intervention increases ART and MAT use and reduces mortality among PWID. The low incidence of HIV in both groups impedes a future randomised, controlled trial, but given the strength of the effect of the intervention, its implementation among HIV-infected PWID should be considered.FundingUS National Institutes of Health

Enhanced infection prophylaxis reduces mortality in severely immunosuppressed HIV-infected adults and older children initiating antiretroviral therapy in Kenya, Malawi, Uganda and Zimbabwe: the REALITY trial

Meeting abstract FRAB0101LB from 21st International AIDS Conference 18–22 July 2016, Durban, South Africa. Introduction: Mortality from infections is high in the first 6 months of antiretroviral therapy (ART) among HIV‐infected adults and children with advanced disease in sub‐Saharan Africa. Whether an enhanced package of infection prophylaxis at ART initiation would reduce mortality is unknown. Methods: The REALITY 2×2×2 factorial open‐label trial (ISRCTN43622374) randomized ART‐naïve HIV‐infected adults and children >5 years with CD4 <100 cells/mm3. This randomization compared initiating ART with enhanced prophylaxis (continuous cotrimoxazole plus 12 weeks isoniazid/pyridoxine (anti‐tuberculosis) and fluconazole (anti‐cryptococcal/candida), 5 days azithromycin (anti‐bacterial/protozoal) and single‐dose albendazole (anti‐helminth)), versus standard‐of‐care cotrimoxazole. Isoniazid/pyridoxine/cotrimoxazole was formulated as a scored fixed‐dose combination. Two other randomizations investigated 12‐week adjunctive raltegravir or supplementary food. The primary endpoint was 24‐week mortality. Results: 1805 eligible adults (n = 1733; 96.0%) and children/adolescents (n = 72; 4.0%) (median 36 years; 53.2% male) were randomized to enhanced (n = 906) or standard prophylaxis (n = 899) and followed for 48 weeks (3.8% loss‐to‐follow‐up). Median baseline CD4 was 36 cells/mm3 (IQR: 16–62) but 47.3% were WHO Stage 1/2. 80 (8.9%) enhanced versus 108(12.2%) standard prophylaxis died before 24 weeks (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.73 (95% CI: 0.54–0.97) p = 0.03; Figure 1) and 98(11.0%) versus 127(14.4%) respectively died before 48 weeks (aHR = 0.75 (0.58–0.98) p = 0.04), with no evidence of interaction with the two other randomizations (p > 0.8). Enhanced prophylaxis significantly reduced incidence of tuberculosis (p = 0.02), cryptococcal disease (p = 0.01), oral/oesophageal candidiasis (p = 0.02), deaths of unknown cause (p = 0.02) and (marginally) hospitalisations (p = 0.06) but not presumed severe bacterial infections (p = 0.38). Serious and grade 4 adverse events were marginally less common with enhanced prophylaxis (p = 0.06). CD4 increases and VL suppression were similar between groups (p > 0.2). Conclusions: Enhanced infection prophylaxis at ART initiation reduces early mortality by 25% among HIV‐infected adults and children with advanced disease. The pill burden did not adversely affect VL suppression. Policy makers should consider adopting and implementing this low‐cost broad infection prevention package which could save 3.3 lives for every 100 individuals treated