How universal does universal test and treat have to be?

HIV treatment as prevention, not only of HIV-related disease but also of transmission, was proposed in 2006 as a means to end the epidemic.1 Several influential studies and models predicted that early treatment of most people who live with HIV (PLWH) could reduce HIV transmission rates to near zero, at the population level.1, 2, 3 As a result, treatment as prevention evolved into the universal HIV test-and-treat (UTT) approach, which entails offering HIV counselling and testing to an entire population and ART to all PLWH. In 2014, UNAIDS announced ambitious new goals to “end AIDS by 2030” by reaching 90-90-90 targets by 2020: 90% of PLWH knowing their status, 90% ART coverage among those knowing their status, and 90% viral suppression among people on ART

The impact, effectiveness and outcomes of targeted screening thresholds for programmatic latent TB infection testing in HIV: cohort study results.

Background:  Screening and treatment for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) are key for TB control. In the UK, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the British HIV Association (BHIVA) give conflicting guidance on which groups of people living with HIV (PLWH) should be screened, and previous national analysis demonstrated heterogeneity in how guidance is applied. There is an urgent need for a firmer clinical effectiveness evidence base on which to build screening policy. Methods:  We conducted a systematic, programmatic LTBI screening intervention for all PLWH receiving care in Leicester, UK. We compared yields (percentage IGRA positive) and number of tests required when applying the NICE and BHIVA testing strategies, as well as strategies targeting screening by TB incidence in patients’ countries of birth. Results:  Of 1053 PLWH tested, 118 were IGRA-positive (11.2%). Positivity was associated with higher TB incidence in country-of-birth (adjusted odds ratio, 50–149 cases compared to 150/100,000 or any sub-Saharan African country, would have correctly identified 89·8% of all LTBI cases while cutting tests required by 46·1% compared to NICE guidance, performing as well as BHIVA 2018 guidance. Conclusions:  Targeting screening to higher-risk PLWH increases yield and reduces the number requiring testing. Our proposed ‘PLWH-LTBI streamlined guidance’ offers a simplified approach, with the potential to improve national LTBI screening implementation.</p

Face Mask Acceptability for Communal Religious Worship During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United Kingdom: Results from the CONFESS Study

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to restrictions such as social distancing and mandatory wearing of face masks. Singing and religious gatherings have been linked to infection clusters, and between 2020 and 2021 indoor congregational singing and chanting were prohibited in the United Kingdom. We evaluated attitudes to face mask use and their acceptability as well as changes within places of worship since their reopening in July up to autumn 2020. In this cross-sectional study, participants were recruited using convenience sampling through selective targeting of religious organisations and social media. Participants self-enrolled and completed an online questionnaire, which included open and closed questions. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with face mask acceptability. We performed thematic analysis to evaluate responses to open questions. A total of 939 participants were included in the analysis. Median age was 52.7 years and 66.1% were female, while 80.7% identified as Christian. A majority (672/861; 78.0%) of participants would find it acceptable to wear a face mask and reduce their singing or chanting volume if required, even though 428/681 (49.1%) found face masks to be uncomfortable. Multivariable regression found that younger age was associated with a higher acceptability of face masks (adjusted OR (aOR): 0.98 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.96–1.00), p = 0.0218). The majority of respondents stated that religious services had become shorter, attended by fewer people and with reduced singing or chanting. Most (869/893, 97.3%) stated their place of worship complied with government guidelines, with 803/887 (90.5%) reported that their place of worship enforced face mask wearing and 793/887 (89.4%) at least moderately happy with precaution measures. Our study demonstrates the significant impact of COVID-19 in places of worship but a high degree of compliance with guidelines. Face masks, despite practical difficulties, appeared to be more acceptable if there was an incentive of being able to sing and chant.</p

Prevention and treatment of infectious diseases in migrants in Europe in the era of universal health coverage.

Some subpopulations of migrants to Europe are generally healthier than the population of the country of settlement, but are at increased risk of key infectious diseases, including tuberculosis, HIV, and viral hepatitis, as well as under- immunisation. Infection screening programmes across Europe work in disease silos with a focus on individual diseases at the time of arrival. We argue that European health-care practitioners and policy makers would benefit from developing a framework of universal health care for migrants, which proactively offers early testing and vaccinations by delivering multi-disease testing and catch-up vaccination programmes integrated within existing health systems. Such interventions should be codeveloped with migrant populations to overcome barriers faced in accessing services. Aligning policies with the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control guidance for health care for migrants, community-based preventive health-care programmes should be delivered as part of universal health care. However, effective implementation needs appropriate funding, and to be underpinned by high-quality evidence

What is the burden of heterosexually-acquired HIV due to HSV-2? Global and regional model-based estimates of the proportion and number of HIV infections attributable to HSV-2 infection

Background: Biological and epidemiological evidence suggest that herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) elevates HIV acquisition and transmission risks. We improved previous estimates of the contribution of HSV-2 to HIV infections by using a dynamic transmission model.Setting: World Health Organization regions.Methods: We developed a mathematical model of HSV-2/HIV transmission among 15- to 49-year-old heterosexual, non–drug-injecting populations, calibrated using region-specific demographic and HSV-2/HIV epidemiological data. We derived global and regional estimates of the contribution of HSV-2 to HIV infection over 10 years [the transmission population-attributable fraction (tPAF)] under 3 additive scenarios, assuming: (1) HSV-2 increases only HIV acquisition risk (conservative); (2) HSV-2 also increases HIV transmission risk (liberal); and (3) HIV or antiretroviral therapy (ART) also modifies HSV-2 transmission risk, and HSV-2 decreases ART effect on HIV transmission risk (fully liberal).Results: Under the conservative scenario, the predicted tPAF was 37.3% (95% uncertainty interval: 33.4%–43.2%), and an estimated 5.6 (4.5–7.0) million incident heterosexual HIV infections were due to HSV-2 globally over 2009–2018. The contribution of HSV-2 to HIV infections was largest for the African region [tPAF = 42.6% (38.0%–51.2%)] and lowest for the European region [tPAF = 11.2% (7.9%–13.8%)]. The tPAF was higher among female sex workers, their clients, and older populations, reflecting their higher HSV-2 prevalence. The tPAF was approximately 50% and 1.3- to 2.4-fold higher for the liberal or fully liberal scenario than the conservative scenario across regions.Conclusion: HSV-2 may have contributed to at least 37% of incident HIV infections in the past decade worldwide, and even more in Africa, and may continue to do so despite increased ART access unless future improved HSV-2 control measures, such as vaccines, become available.</h4

National policies for delivering tuberculosis, HIV and hepatitis B and C virus infection services for refugees and migrants among Member States of the WHO European Region

Background/objective Refugees and migrants to the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region are disproportionately affected by infections, including tuberculosis (TB), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis B and C (HBV/HCV) compared with the host population. There are inequities in the accessibility and quality of health services available to refugees and migrants in the Region. This has consequences for health outcomes and will ultimately impact the ability to meet Regional infection elimination targets. Methods We reviewed academic and grey literature to identify national policies and guidelines for TB/HIV/HBV/HCV specific to refugees and migrants in the Member States of the WHO European Region and to identify: (i) evidence informing policy and (ii) barriers and facilitators to policy implementation. Results Relatively few primary national policy/guideline documents were identified which related to refugees and migrants and TB [14 of 53 Member States (26%), HIV (n = 15, 28%) and HBV/HCV (n = 3, 6%)], which often did not align with the WHO recommendations, and for some countries, violated refugees' and migrants’ human rights. We found extreme heterogeneity in the implementation of the WHO- and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)-advocated policies and recommendations on the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care of TB/HIV/HBV/HCV infection among migrants across the Member States of the WHO European Region. There is great heterogeneity in implementation of WHO- and ECDC-advocated policies on the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care of TB/HIV/HBV/HCV infection in refugees and migrants across the Member States in the Region. Conclusion More transparent and accessible reporting of national policies and guidelines are required, together with the evidence base upon which these policy decisions are based. Political engagement is essential to drive the changes in national legislation to ensure equitable and universal access to the diagnosis and care for infectious diseases.</p