Optimal timing of viral load monitoring during pregnancy to predict viraemia at delivery in HIV-infected women initiating ART in South Africa: a simulation study.

Abstract

Introduction HIV viral load (VL) monitoring is a central tool to evaluate ART effectiveness and transmission risk. There is a global movement to expand VL monitoring following recent recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO), but there has been little research into VL monitoring in pregnant women. We investigated one important question in this area: when and how frequently VL should be monitored in women initiating ART during pregnancy to predict VL at the time of delivery in a simulated South African population.MethodsWe developed a mathematical model simulating VL from conception through delivery using VL data from the Maternal and Child Health – Antiretroviral Therapy (MCH‐ART) cohort. VL was modelled based on three major compartments: pre‐ART VL, viral decay immediately after ART initiation and viral maintenance (including viral suppression and viraemic episodes). Using this simulation, we examined the performance of various VL monitoring schema in predicting elevated VL at delivery.Results and discussionIf WHO guidelines for non‐pregnant adults were used, the majority of HIV‐infected pregnant women (69%) would not receive a VL test during pregnancy. Most models that based VL monitoring in pregnancy on the time elapsed since ART initiation (regardless of gestation) performed poorly (sensitivity <50%); models that based VL measures in pregnancy on the woman's gestation (regardless of time on ART) appeared to perform better overall (sensitivity >60%). Across all permutations, inclusion of pre‐ART VL values had a negligible impact on predictive performance (improving test sensitivity and specificity <6%). Performance of VL monitoring in predicting VL at delivery generally improved at later gestations, with the best performing option a single VL measure at 36 weeks’ gestation.ConclusionsDevelopment and evaluation of a novel simulation model suggests that strategies to measure VL relative to gestational age may be more useful than strategies relative to duration on ART, in women initiating ART during pregnancy, supporting better integration of maternal and HIV health services. Testing turnaround times require careful consideration, and point‐of‐care VL testing may be the best approach for measuring VL at delivery. Broadening the scope of this simulation model in the light of current scale up of VL monitoring in high burden countries is important.