Search

Background: HIV is a potent risk factor for tuberculosis (TB). Therefore, community-wide universal testing and treatment for HIV (UTT) could contribute to TB control, but evidence for this is limited. Community-wide TB screening can decrease population-level TB prevalence. Combining UTT with TB screening could therefore significantly impact TB control in sub-Saharan Africa, but to our knowledge there is no evidence for this combined approach. Methods and findings: HPTN 071 (PopART) was a community-randomised trial conducted between November 2013 to July 2018; 21 Zambian and South African communities (with a total population of approximately 1 million individuals) were randomised to arms A (community-wide UTT and TB screening), B (community-wide universal HIV testing with treatment following national guidelines and TB screening), or C (standard-of-care). In a cohort of randomly selected adults (18 to 44 years) enrolled between 2013 and 2015 from all 21 communities (total size 38,474; 27,139 [71%] female; 8,004 [21%] HIV positive) and followed-up annually for 36 months to measure the population-level impact of the interventions, data on self-reported TB treatment in the previous 12 months (self-reported TB) were collected by trained research assistants and recorded using a structured questionnaire at each study visit. In this prespecified analysis of the trial, self-reported TB incidence rates were measured by calendar year between 2014 and 2017/2018. A p-value ≤0.05 on hypothesis testing was defined as reaching statistical significance. Between January 2014 and July 2018, 38,287 individuals were followed-up: 494 self-reported TB during 104,877 person-years. Overall incidence rates were similar across all arms in 2014 and 2015 (0.33 to 0.46/100 person-years). In 2016 incidence rates were lower in arm A compared to C overall (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] 0.48 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.28 to 0.81; p = 0.01]), with statistical significance reached. In 2017/2018, while incidence rates were lower in arm A compared to C, statistical significance was not reached (aRR 0.58 [95% CI 0.27 to 1.22; p = 0.13]). Among people living with HIV (PLHIV) incidence rates were lower in arm A compared to C in 2016 (RR 0.56 [95% CI 0.29 to 1.08; p = 0.08]) and 2017/2018 (RR 0.50 [95% CI 0.26 to 0.95; p = 0.04]); statistical significance was only reached in 2017/2018. Incidence rates in arms B and C were similar, overall and among PLHIV. Among HIV–negative individuals, there were too few events for cross-arm comparisons. Study limitations include the use of self-report which may have been subject to under-reporting, limited covariate adjustment due to the small number of events, and high losses to follow-up over time. Conclusions: In this study, community-wide UTT and TB screening resulted in substantially lower TB incidence among PLHIV at population-level, compared to standard-of-care, with statistical significance reached in the final study year. There was also some evidence this translated to a decrease in self-reported TB incidence overall in the population. Reduction in arm A but not B suggests UTT drove the observed effect. Our data support the role of UTT in TB control, in addition to HIV control, in high TB/HIV burden settings. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01900977. Lily Telisinghe and co-workers study self-reported tuberculosis incidence among communities in Zambia and South Africa in the PopART trial of universal HIV testing and treatment and tuberculosis screening. Author summary: Why was this study done?: Tuberculosis (TB) is a leading cause of sickness and death worldwide. In sub-Saharan Africa, TB is mainly driven by the HIV-epidemic. Between 2013 and 2018, the HPTN 071 cluster-randomised trial was conducted in 21 Zambian and South African communities. There were 3 study arms: (1) arm A which received universal testing and treatment for HIV (UTT) and TB screening; (2) arm B which received universal HIV testing (with antiretroviral therapy (ART) according to national guidelines) and TB screening; and (3) arm C the control. As part of the trial, a cohort of 38,474 adults aged 18 to 44 years were enrolled from all communities at the start and followed-up annually over 36 months. What did the researchers do and find?: All cohort members were asked if they had been started on TB treatment in the last 12 months (self-reported TB), at each annual visit (maximum of 4 visits). We investigated the effect of the interventions on self-reported TB incidence. We found a decrease in self-reported TB incidence among people living with HIV in arm A compared to arm C. There was also some evidence this translated to a decrease in self-reported TB incidence overall in the population in arm A compared to arm C. Self-reported TB incidence was similar in arms B and C, overall in the population and among people living with HIV. We could not determine the effect of the interventions on self-reported TB incidence among those who were HIV negative, due to the small number of events. What do these findings mean?: The decrease in self-reported TB incidence in arm A (which received community-wide UTT and TB screening) but not arm B (which received community-wide HIV testing with ART according to national guidelines and TB screening) suggests the UTT component of the intervention drove the changes observed in arm A. Our data support the role of UTT in TB control in sub-Saharan Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A universal testing and treatment strategy is a potential approach to reduce the incidence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, yet previous trial results are inconsistent.Methods: In the HPTN 071 (PopART) community-randomized trial conducted from 2013 through 2018, we randomly assigned 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa (total population, approximately 1 million) to group A (combination prevention intervention with universal antiretroviral therapy [ART]), group B (the prevention intervention with ART provided according to local guidelines [universal since 2016]), or group C (standard care). The prevention intervention included home-based HIV testing delivered by community workers, who also supported linkage to HIV care and ART adherence. The primary outcome, HIV incidence between months 12 and 36, was measured in a population cohort of approximately 2000 randomly sampled adults (18 to 44 years of age) per community. Viral suppression (<400 copies of HIV RNA per milliliter) was assessed in all HIV-positive participants at 24 months.Results: The population cohort included 48,301 participants. Baseline HIV prevalence was 21% or 22% in each group. Between months 12 and 36, a total of 553 new HIV infections were observed during 39,702 person-years (1.4 per 100 person-years; women, 1.7; men, 0.8). The adjusted rate ratio for group A as compared with group C was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.18; P = 0.51) and for group B as compared with group C was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.88; P = 0.006). The percentage of HIV-positive participants with viral suppression at 24 months was 71.9% in group A, 67.5% in group B, and 60.2% in group C. The estimated percentage of HIV-positive adults in the community who were receiving ART at 36 months was 81% in group A and 80% in group B.Conclusions: A combination prevention intervention with ART provided according to local guidelines resulted in a 30% lower incidence of HIV infection than standard care. The lack of effect with universal ART was unanticipated and not consistent with the data on viral suppression. In this trial setting, universal testing and treatment reduced the population-level incidence of HIV infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; HPTN 071 [PopArt] ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01900977.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People living with HIV (PLHIV) report lower health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) than HIV-negative people. HIV stigma may contribute to this. We explored the association between HIV stigma and HRQoL among PLHIV. We used cross-sectional data from 3991 randomly selected PLHIV who were surveyed in 2017-2018 for HPTN 071 (PopART), a cluster randomised trial in Zambia and South Africa. Participants were 18-44 years, had laboratory-confirmed HIV infection, and knew their status. HRQoL was measured using the EuroQol-5-dimensions-5-levels (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire. Stigma outcomes included: internalised stigma, stigma experienced in the community, and stigma experienced in healthcare settings. Associations were examined using logistic regression. Participants who had experienced community stigma (n = 693/3991) had higher odds of reporting problems in at least one HRQoL domain, compared to those who had not (adjusted odds ratio, aOR: 1.51, 95% confidence interval, 95% Cl: 1.16-1.98, p = 0.002). Having experienced internalised stigma was also associated with reporting problems in at least one HRQoL domain (n = 552/3991, aOR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.54-2.54, p < 0.001). However, having experienced stigma in a healthcare setting was less common (n = 158/3991) and not associated with HRQoL (aOR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.68-1.58, p = 0.850). A stronger focus on interventions for internalised stigma and stigma experienced in the community is required., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Comprehensive HIV prevention strategies have raised concerns that knowledge of interventions to reduce risk of HIV infection might mitigate an individual's perception of risk, resulting in riskier sexual behaviour. We investigated the prespecified secondary outcomes of the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial to determine whether a combination HIV prevention strategy, including universal HIV testing and treatment, changed sexual behaviour; specifically, we investigated whether there was evidence of sexual risk compensation., Methods: HPTN 071 (PopART) was a cluster-randomised trial conducted during 2013-18, in which we randomly assigned 21 communities with high HIV prevalence in Zambia and South Africa (total population, approximately 1 million) to combination prevention intervention with universal antiretroviral therapy (ART; arm A), prevention intervention with ART provided according to local guidelines (universal since 2016; arm B), or standard of care (arm C). The trial included a population cohort of approximately 2000 randomly selected adults (aged 18-44 years) in each community (N=38 474 at baseline) who were followed up for 36 months. A prespecified secondary objective was to evaluate the impact of the PopART intervention compared with standard of care on herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) and sexual behaviour (N=20 422 completed final visit). Secondary endpoints included differences in sexual risk behaviour measures at 36 months and were assessed using a two-stage method for matched cluster-randomised trials. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials. gov, number NCT01900977., Findings: The PopART intervention did not substantially change probability of self-reported multiple sex partners, sexual debut, or pregnancy in women at 36 months. Adjusted for baseline community prevalence, reported condomless sex was significantly lower in arm A versus arm C (adjusted prevalence ratio 0·80 [95% CI 0·64-0·99]; p=0·04) but not in arm B versus arm C (0·94 [0·76-1·17]; p=0·55). 3-year HSV-2 incidence was reduced in arm B versus arm C (adjusted risk ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·63-0·92]; p=0·010); no significant change was shown between arm A versus arm C (0·89 [0·73-1·08]; p=0·199)., Interpretation: We found little evidence of any change in sexual behaviour owing to the PopART interventions, and reassuringly for public health, we saw no evidence of sexual risk compensation. The findings do not help to explain the differences between the two intervention groups of the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial., Funding: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the National Institutes of Health, the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, and the Medical Research Council UK., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests HA and DD report on behalf of the entire study team, grant funding from: the NIH, the international initiative for impact evaluation (3ie), the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (also reflected in Acknowledgments). HA reports membership in the technical review panel for the Global Fund. NB-M is a member on the HPTN Ethics Working Group. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: To investigate the association between individual and community-level measures of HIV stigma and HIV incidence within the 21 communities participating in the HPTN (071) PopART trial in Zambia and South Africa., Methods: Secondary analysis of data from a population-based cohort followed-up over 36 months between 2013 and 2018. The outcome was rate of incident HIV infection among individuals who were HIV negative at cohort entry. Individual-level exposures, measured in a random sample of all participants, were: (1) perception of stigma in the community, (2) perception of stigma in health settings and (3) fear and judgement towards people living with HIV. Individual-level analyses were conducted with adjusted, individual-level Poisson regression. Community-level HIV stigma exposures drew on data reported by people living with HIV, health workers and community members. We used linear regression to explore the association between HIV stigma and community-level HIV incidence., Results: Among 8172 individuals who were HIV negative and answered individual-level stigma questions at enrolment to the cohort, there was no evidence of a statistically significant association between any domain of HIV stigma and risk of incident HIV infection. Among the full cohort of 26,110 individuals among whom HIV incidence was measured, there was no evidence that community-level HIV incidence was associated with any domain of HIV stigma., Conclusions: HIV stigma is often cited as a barrier to the effectiveness of HIV prevention programming. However, in the setting for the HPTN 071 "PopART trial," measured stigma alone was not associated with the risk of HIV infection., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of the International AIDS Society published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International AIDS Society.)

Background: The impact of HIV stigma on viral suppression among people living with HIV (PLHIV) is not well characterized., Setting: Twenty-one communities in Zambia and South Africa, nested within the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial., Methods: We analyzed data on viral suppression (<400 copies HIV RNA/mL) among 5662 laboratory-confirmed PLHIV aged 18-44 years who were randomly sampled within the PopART trial population cohort 24 months after enrolment (PC24). We collected data on experiences and internalization of stigma from those PLHIV who self-reported their HIV status (n = 3963/5662) and data on perceptions of stigma from a 20% random sample of all PLHIV (n = 1154/5662). We also measured stigma at the community-level among PLHIV, community members, and health workers. We analyzed the association between individual- and community-level measures of HIV stigma and viral suppression among PLHIV, adjusting for confounding., Results: Of all 5662 PLHIV, 69.1% were virally suppressed at PC24. Viral suppression was highest among those 3963 cohort participants who self-reported living with HIV and were on ART (88.3%), and lower among those not on treatment (37.5%). Self-identifying PLHIV who reported internalized stigma were less likely to be virally suppressed (75.0%) than those who did not (80.7%; adjusted risk ratio, 0.94 95% CI: 0.89 to 0.98). Experiences, perceptions, and community-level measures of stigma were not associated with viral suppression., Conclusion: Internalized stigma among PLHIV was associated with a lower level of viral suppression; other dimensions of stigma were not. Stigma reduction approaches that address internalized stigma should be an integral component of efforts to control the HIV epidemic.

Objectives: To assess the impact of a combination HIV prevention intervention including universal testing and treatment (UTT) on HIV stigma among people living with HIV, and among community members and health workers not living with HIV., Design: This HIV stigma study was nested in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial, a three-arm cluster randomised trial conducted between 2013 and 2018 in 21 urban/peri-urban communities (12 in Zambia and nine in South Africa)., Methods: Using an adjusted two-stage cluster-level analysis, controlling for baseline imbalances, we compared multiple domains of stigma between the trial arms at 36 months. Different domains of stigma were measured among three cohorts recruited across all study communities: 4178 randomly sampled adults aged 18-44 who were living with HIV, and 3487 randomly sampled adults and 1224 health workers who did not self-report living with HIV., Results: Prevalence of any stigma reported by people living with HIV at 36 months was 20.2% in arm A, 26.1% in arm B, and 19.1% in arm C (adjusted prevalence ratio, A vs. C 1.01 95% CI 0.49-2.08, B vs. C 1.34 95% CI 0.65-2.75). There were no significant differences between arms in any other measures of stigma across all three cohorts. All measures of stigma reduced over time (0.2--4.1% reduction between rounds) with most reductions statistically significant., Conclusion: We found little evidence that UTT either increased or decreased HIV stigma measured among people living with HIV, or among community members or health workers not living with HIV. Stigma reduced over time, but slowly. CLINICALTRIALS., Gov Number: NCT01900977.

To achieve UNAIDS 90:90:90 targets at population-level, knowledge of HIV status must be followed by timely linkage to care, initiation and maintenance of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for all people living with HIV (PLHIV). Interpreting quantitative patterns using qualitative data, we investigate time taken to link to care and initiate ART amongst individuals aware of their HIV-status in high HIV-prevalence urban communities in the HPTN 071 (PopART) study, a community-randomised trial of a combination HIV prevention package, including universal testing and treatment, in 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa. Data are drawn from the seven intervention communities where immediate ART irrespective if CD4 count was offered from the trial-start in 2014. Median time from HIV-diagnosis to ART initiation reduced after 2 years of delivering the intervention from 10 to 6 months in both countries but varied by gender and community of residence. Social and health system realities impact decisions made by PLHIV about ART initiation.

Background: Southern Africa has had an unprecedented increase in the burden of tuberculosis, driven by the HIV epidemic. The Zambia, South Africa Tuberculosis and AIDS Reduction (ZAMSTAR) trial examined two public health interventions that aimed to reduce the burden of tuberculosis by facilitating either rapid sputum diagnosis or integrating tuberculosis and HIV services within the community., Methods: ZAMSTAR was a community-randomised trial done in Zambia and the Western Cape province of South Africa. Two interventions, community-level enhanced tuberculosis case-finding (ECF) and household level tuberculosis-HIV care, were implemented between Aug 1, 2006, and July 31, 2009, and assessed in a 2×2 factorial design between Jan 9, 2010, and Dec 6, 2010. All communities had a strengthened tuberculosis-HIV programme implemented in participating health-care centres. 24 communities, selected according to population size and tuberculosis notification rate, were randomly allocated to one of four study groups using a randomisation schedule stratified by country and baseline prevalence of tuberculous infection: group 1 strengthened tuberculosis-HIV programme at the clinic alone; group 2, clinic plus ECF; group 3, clinic plus household intervention; and group 4, clinic plus ECF and household interventions. The primary outcome was the prevalence of culture-confirmed pulmonary tuberculosis in adults (≥18 years), defined as Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolated from one respiratory sample, measured 4 years after the start of interventions in a survey of 4000 randomly selected adults in each community in 2010. The secondary outcome was the incidence of tuberculous infection, measured using tuberculin skin testing in a cohort of schoolchildren, a median of 4 years after a baseline survey done before the start of interventions. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN36729271., Findings: Prevalence of tuberculosis was evaluated in 64,463 individuals randomly selected from the 24 communities; 894 individuals had active tuberculosis. Averaging over the 24 communities, the geometric mean of tuberculosis prevalence was 832 per 100,000 population. The adjusted prevalence ratio for the comparison of ECF versus non-ECF intervention groups was 1·09 (95% CI 0·86-1·40) and of household versus non-household intervention groups was 0·82 (0·64-1·04). The incidence of tuberculous infection was measured in a cohort of 8809 children, followed up for a median of 4 years; the adjusted rate ratio for ECF versus non-ECF groups was 1·36 (95% CI 0·59-3·14) and for household versus non-household groups was 0·45 (0·20-1·05)., Interpretation: Although neither intervention led to a statistically significant reduction in tuberculosis, two independent indicators of burden provide some evidence of a reduction in tuberculosis among communities receiving the household intervention. By contrast the ECF intervention had no effect on either outcome., Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: In South Africa the estimated incidence of all forms of tuberculosis (TB) for 2008 was 960/100000. It was reported that all South Africans lived in districts with Directly Observed Therapy, Short-course. However, the 2011 WHO report indicated South Africa as the only country in the world where the TB incidence is still rising., Aims: To report the results of a TB prevalence survey and to determine the speed of TB case detection in the study communities., Methods: In 2005 a TB prevalence survey was done to inform the sample size calculation for the ZAMSTAR (Zambia South Africa TB and AIDS Reduction) trial. It was a cluster survey with clustering by enumeration area; all households were visited within enumeration areas and informed consent obtained from eligible adults. A questionnaire was completed and a sputum sample collected from each adult. Samples were inoculated on both liquid mycobacterium growth indicator tube (MGIT) and Löwenstein-Jensen media. A follow-up HIV prevalence survey was done in 2007., Results: In Community A, the adjusted prevalence of culture positive TB was 32/1000 (95%CI 25-41/1000) and of smear positive TB 8/1000 (95%CI 5-13/1000). In Community B, the adjusted prevalence of culture positive TB was 24/1000 (95%CI 17-32/1000) and of smear positive TB 9/1000 (95%CI 6-15/1000). In Community A the patient diagnostic rate was 0.38/person-year while in community B it was 0.30/person-year. In both communities the adjusted HIV prevalence was 25% (19-30%)., Discussion: In both communities a higher TB prevalence than national estimates and a low patient diagnostic rate was calculated, suggesting that cases are not detected at a sufficient rate to interrupt transmission. These findings may contribute to the rising TB incidence in South Africa. The TB epidemic should therefore be addressed rapidly and effectively, especially in the presence of the concurrently high HIV prevalence.