Recent Infection Testing Algorithms Research Articles

The impact of non-disclosure of HIV status and antiretroviral therapy on HIV recency testing and incidence algorithms.

Accurate HIV incidence estimates among blood donors are necessary to assess the effectiveness of programs aimed at limiting transfusion-transmitted HIV. We assessed the impact of undisclosed HIV status and antiretroviral (ARV) use on HIV recency and incidence estimates using increasingly comprehensive recent infection testing algorithms. Using 2017 donation data from first-time and lapsed donors, we populated four HIV recency algorithms: (1) serology and limiting-antigen avidity testing, (2) with individual donation nucleic amplification testing (ID-NAT) added to Algorithm 1, (3) with viral load added to Algorithm 2 and (4) with ARV testing added to Algorithm 3. Algorithm-specific mean durations of recent infection (MDRI) and false recency rates (FRR) were calculated and used to derive and compare incidence estimates. Compared with Algorithm 4, progressive algorithms misclassified fewer donors as recent: Algorithm 1: 61 (12.1%); Algorithm 2: 14 (2.8%) and Algorithm 3: 3 (0.6%). Algorithm-specific MDRI and FRR values resulted in marginally lower incidence estimates: Algorithm 1: 0.19% per annum (p.a.) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13%-0.26%); Algorithm 2: 0.18% p.a. (95% CI: 0.13%-0.22%); Algorithm 3: 0.17% p.a. (95% CI: 0.13%-0.22%) and Algorithm 4: 0.17% p.a. (95% CI: 0.13%-0.21%). We confirmed significant misclassification of recent HIV cases when not including viral load and ARV testing. Context-specific MDRI and FRR resulted in progressively lower incidence estimates but did not fully account for the context-specific variability in incidence modelling. The inclusion of ARV testing, in addition to viral load and ID-NAT testing, did not have a significant impact on incidence estimates.

Precision detection of recent HIV infections using high-throughput genomic incidence assay.

HIV incidence is a key measure for tracking disease spread and identifying populations and geographic regions where new infections are most concentrated. The HIV sequence population provides a robust signal for the stage of infection. Large-scale and high-precision HIV sequencing is crucial for effective genomic incidence surveillance. We produced 1,034 full-length envelope gene sequences from a seroconversion cohort by conducting HIV microdrop sequencing and measuring the genomic incidence assay's genome similarity index (GSI) dynamics. The measured dynamics of 9 of 12 individuals aligned with the GSI distribution estimated independently using 417 publicly available incident samples. We enhanced the capacity to identify individuals with recent infections, achieving predicted detection accuracies of 92% (89%-94%) for cases within 6 months and 81% (74%-87%) for cases within 9 months. These accuracy levels agreed with the observed detection accuracy intervals of an independent validation data set. Additionally, we produced 131 full-length envelope gene sequences from eight individuals with chronic HIV infection. This analysis confirmed a false recency rate (FRR) of 0%, which was consistent with 162 publicly available chronic samples. The mean duration of recent infection (MDRI) was 238 (209-267) days, indicating an 83% improvement in performance compared to current recent infection testing algorithms. The shifted Poisson mixture model was then used to estimate the time since infection, and the model estimates showed an 88% consistency with the days post infection derived from HIV RNA test dates and/or seroconversion dates. HIV microdrop sequencing provides unique prospects for large-scale incidence surveillance using high-throughput sequencing. IMPORTANCE Accurate identification of recently infected individuals is vital for prioritizing specific populations for interventions, reducing onward transmission risks, and optimizing public health services. However, current HIV-specific antibody-based methods have not been satisfactory in accurately identifying incident cases, hindering the use of HIV recency testing for prevention efforts and partner protection. Genomic incidence assays offer a promising alternative for identifying recent infections. In our study, we used microdroplet technologies to produce a large number of complete HIV envelope gene sequences, enabling the accurate detection of early infection signs. We assessed the dynamics of the incidence assay's metrics and compared them with statistical models. Our approach demonstrated high accuracy in identifying individuals with recent infections, achieving predicted detection rates exceeding 90% within 6 months and over 80% within 9 months of infection. This high-resolution method holds significant potential for enhancing the effectiveness of HIV incidence screening for case-based surveillance in public health initiatives.

Improving Biomarker-based HIV Incidence Estimation in the Treatment Era.

Estimating HIV-1 incidence using biomarker assays in cross-sectional surveys is important for understanding the HIV pandemic. However, the utility of these estimates has been limited by uncertainty about what input parameters to use for false recency rate (FRR) and mean duration of recent infection (MDRI) after applying a recent infection testing algorithm (RITA). This article shows how testing and diagnosis reduce both FRR and mean duration of recent infection compared to a treatment-naive population. A new method is proposed for calculating appropriate context-specific estimates of FRR and mean duration of recent infection. The result of this is a new formula for incidence that depends only on reference FRR and mean duration of recent infection parameters derived in an undiagnosed, treatment-naive, nonelite controller, non-AIDS-progressed population. Applying the methodology to eleven cross-sectional surveys in Africa results in good agreement with previous incidence estimates, except in 2 countries with very high reported testing rates. Incidence estimation equations can be adapted to account for the dynamics of treatment and recent infection testing algorithms. This provides a rigorous mathematical foundation for the application of HIV recency assays in cross-sectional surveys.

Adult HIV-1 incidence across 15 high-burden countries in sub-Saharan Africa from 2015 to 2019: a pooled analysis of nationally representative data

Harmonised population-based surveys with recent HIV-1 infection testing algorithms permit pooled cross-sectional estimation of HIV incidence across multiple countries. We aimed to estimate adult HIV-1 incidence rates and number of new infections by sex, age, and subregion in sub-Saharan Africa. We analysed data from 13 Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment (PHIA) surveys and two additional population-based surveys done between 2015 and 2019 in 15 sub-Saharan African countries. HIV-seropositive samples from adults aged 15-59 years were tested for recent HIV-1 infection by use of an algorithm consisting of the HIV-1 limiting antigen avidity enzyme immunoassay, HIV-1 viral load, and qualitative detection of antiretroviral agents. Data were pooled across countries; sampling weights were incorporated to represent all adults in the 15 national populations. Analyses accounted for the complex sample designs. HIV incidence rates, incidence rate differences, and number of new annual infections were estimated. Among 445 979 adults sampled, 382 had recent HIV-1 infection. The estimated HIV-1 incidence rate was 3·3 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 2·6-4·0) among women and 2·0 per 1000 person-years (1·2-2·7) among men (incidence rate difference 1·3 per 1000 person-years, 95% CI 0·3-2·3). Among adults aged 15-24 years, the incidence rate was higher for women (3·5 per 1000 person-years) than men (1·2 per 1000 person-years; difference 2·3, 95% CI 0·8-3·8), but infection rates were similar between sexes in all other age groups. The HIV-1 incidence rate was 7·4 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 5·0-9·7) in southern sub-Saharan Africa, 2·3 per 1000 person-years (1·7-2·9) in the eastern subregion, and 0·9 per 1000 person-years (0·6-1·2) in the western and central subregion. 689 000 (95% CI 546 000-833 000) new HIV cases were estimated annually among the 265 million susceptible adults (61·6% in women). HIV-1 incidence and number of new infections differed by age, sex, and subregion. Approaches for risk stratification are needed to guide comprehensive HIV-1 prevention. National Institutes of Health.

Facilitating Next-Generation Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Clinical Trials Using HIV Recent Infection Assays: A Consensus Statement from the Forum HIV Prevention Trial Design Project.

Standard-of-care HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly efficacious, but uptake of and persistence on a daily oral pill is low in many settings. Evaluation of alternate PrEP products will require innovation to avoid the unpractically large sample sizes in noninferiority trials. We propose estimating HIV incidence in people not on PrEP as an external counterfactual to which on-PrEP incidence in trial subjects can be compared. HIV recent infection testing algorithms (RITAs), such as the limiting antigen avidity assay plus viral load used on specimens from untreated HIV positive people identified during screening, is one possible approach. Its feasibility is partly dependent on the sample size needed to ensure adequate power, which is impacted by RITA performance, the number of recent infections identified, the expected efficacy of the intervention, and other factors. Screening sample sizes to support detection of an 80% reduction in incidence for 3 key populations are more modest, and comparable to the number of participants in recent phase III PrEP trials. Sample sizes would be significantly larger in populations with lower incidence, where the false recency rate is higher or if PrEP efficacy is expected to be lower. Our proposed counterfactual approach appears to be feasible, offers high statistical power, and is nearly contemporaneous with the on-PrEP population. It will be important to monitor the performance of this approach during new product development for HIV prevention. If successful, it could be a model for preventive HIV vaccines and prevention of other infectious diseases.

2079. Comparison of Recency Assays to Estimate HIV Incidence in the SIENA (eStimating hIv incidEnce amoNg Agyw) Study in Uganda

Abstract Background HIV-1 recent infection testing algorithms (RITAs) use recency assays to estimate population level HIV incidence rates (IRs), and are currently being employed in PrEP trials to estimate background HIV incidence rates (bHIV-IR). The SIENA study was conducted to determine the HIV incidence rate among young women in and around central and mid-western Uganda, and to assess the suitability of different recency assay platforms for use in determining bHIV-IR in future PrEP trials. Methods Diagnosis of HIV was confirmed by positive results on both the Alere Determine HIV-1/2 and Oraquick HIV-1/2 rapid tests. Positive samples were analyzed for recent infection using the Sedia HIV-1 Limiting Antigen Avidity Enzyme ImmunoAssay (LAg-EIA; Sedia Biosciences, Beaverton, OR) and the Sedia Asante HIV-1 Rapid Recency Assay (Asante; Sedia Biosciences). The Asante assay was performed by electronic reader (Asante-Reader) or visual read (Asante-Visual). VL was determined by COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 Test (LabCorp, Indianapolis, IN). HIV incidence was calculated based on previously determined MDRI and FRRs that were specific for the study population. Results Of 743 women screened, 191 were diagnosed with HIV, of whom 44 (23%) had a viral load of < 75 copies/mL. The 3 recency assays identified between 43 and 57 samples as recent and between 35 and 37 samples when the VL cutoff of < 75 copies/mL was used (Table). When no VL cutoff was used the calculated bHIV-IR was 17.9/100 person-years (PY) for the LAg-EIA, 12.8/100PY for the Asante-Reader and 20.3/100PY for the Asante-Visual. Using the VL cutoff, the calculated bHIV-IR was 11.4/100 PY with the LAg-EIA assay and 10.9/100 PY with the Asante-Reader. No MDRI or FRR for the Asante-Visual with a VL cutoff was available for calculation of the Asante-Visual HIV incidence. Conclusion When the RITA included a VL cutoff of 75 cp/mL, the LAg-EIA and Asante assays classified the number of recent and long-term infections similarly, resulting in comparable bHIV-IR results. Overall, these analyses support the use of these recency assays in the RITA to estimate the bHIV-IR in future PrEP trials. Our results demonstrate extremely high prevalence and incidence of HIV in young women in central and mid-western Uganda, highlighting the need for expanded HIV prevention options in these areas. Disclosures Stephanie Cox, BS, Gilead Sciences: Paid employee|Gilead Sciences: Stocks/Bonds Shelley N. Facente, PhD, MPH, CDC-funded TRACE program: Grant/Research Support|Gilead Sciences: Advisor/Consultant|Sedia Biosciences Corporation: Grant/Research Support Eduard Grebe, PhD, CDC-funded TRACE program: Grant/Research Support|Gilead Sciences: Advisor/Consultant|Sedia Biosciences Corp: Grant/Research Support Ramin Ebrahimi, MS, Gilead Sciences: Paid employee|Gilead Sciences: Stocks/Bonds Christoph C. Carter, MD, PhD, Gilead Sciences: Employee|Gilead Sciences: Employee|Gilead Sciences: Stocks/Bonds|Gilead Sciences: Stocks/Bonds Christian Callebaut, PhD, Gilead Sciences: Paid employee|Gilead Sciences: Stocks/Bonds Jared Baeten, MD, PhD, Gilead Sciences: Employee|Gilead Sciences: Stocks/Bonds Moupali Das, MD, Gilead Sciences: Employee|Gilead Sciences: Employee|Gilead Sciences: Stocks/Bonds|Gilead Sciences: Stocks/Bonds.

Evaluation of antiretroviral therapy effect and prognosis between HIV-1 recent and long-term infection based on a rapid recent infection testing algorithm.

Early diagnosis of HIV-1 infection and immediate initiation of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) are important for achieving better virological suppression and quicker immune reconstitution. However, no serological HIV-1 recency testing assay has been approved for clinical use, and the real-world clinical outcomes remain to be explored for the subjects with HIV-1 recent infection (RI) or long-term infection (LI) when antiretroviral therapy is initiated. In this study, a HIV-1 rapid recent-infection testing strip (RRITS) was developed and incorporated into the recent infection testing algorithms (RITAs) to distinguish HIV-1 RI and LI and to assess their clinical outcomes including virological response, the recovery of CD4+ T-cell count and CD4/CD8 ratio and the probability of survival. We found that the concordance between our RRITS and the commercially available LAg-Avidity EIA was 97.13% and 90.63% when detecting the longitudinal and cross-sectional HIV-1 positive samples, respectively. Among the 200 HIV-1 patients analyzed, 22.5% (45/200) of them were RI patients and 77.5% (155/200) were chronically infected and 30% (60/200) of them were AIDS patients. After cART, 4.1% (5/155) of the LI patients showed virological rebound, but none in the RI group. The proportion of CD4+ T-cell count >500 cells/mm3 was significantly higher in RI patients than in LI after 2 years of cART with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.6 (95% CI: 1.9, 3.6, p < 0.0001) while the probability of CD4/CD8 = 1 was higher in RI than in LI group with a HR of 3.6 (95% CI: 2.2, 5.7, p < 0.0001). Furthermore, the immunological recovery speed was 16 cells/mm3/month for CD4+ T-cell and 0.043/month for the ratio of CD4/CD8 in the RI group, and was bigger in the RI group than in the LI patients (p < 0.05) during the 1st year of cART. The survival probability for LI patients was significantly lower than that for RI patients (p < 0.001). Our results indicated that RRITS combined with RITAs could successfully distinguish HIV-1 RI and LI patients whose clinical outcomes were significantly different after cART. The rapid HIV-1 recency test provides a feasible assay for diagnosing HIV-1 recent infection and a useful tool for predicting the outcomes of HIV-1 patients.

Comparison between HIV self-testing and facility-based HIV testing approach on HIV early detection among men who have sex with men: A cross-sectional study.

BackgroundTo assess whether HIV self-testing (HIVST) has a better performance in identifying HIV-infected cases than the facility-based HIV testing (HIVFBT) approach.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among men who have sex with men (MSM) by using an online questionnaire (including information on sociodemographic, sexual biography, and HIV testing history) and blood samples (for limiting antigen avidity enzyme immunoassay, gene subtype testing, and taking confirmed HIV test). MSM who were firstly identified as HIV positive through HIVST and HIVFBT were compared. Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test was used to explore any association between both groups and their subgroups.ResultsIn total, 124 MSM HIV cases were identified from 2017 to 2021 in Zhuhai, China, including 60 identified through HIVST and 64 through HIVFBT. Participants in the HIVST group were younger (≤30 years, 76.7% vs. 46.9%), were better educated (>high school, 61.7% vs. 39.1%), and had higher viral load (≥1,000 copies/ml, 71.7% vs. 50.0%) than MSM cases identified through HIVFBT. The proportion of early HIV infection in the HIVST group was higher than in the HIVFBT group, identified using four recent infection testing algorithms (RITAs) (RITA 1, 46.7% vs. 25.0%; RITA 2, 43.3% vs. 20.3%; RITA 3, 30.0% vs. 14.1%; RITA 4, 26.7% vs. 10.9%; all p < 0.05).ConclusionsThe study showed that HIVST has better HIV early detection among MSM and that recent HIV infection cases mainly occur in younger and better-educated MSM. Compared with HIVFBT, HIVST is more accessible to the most at-risk population on time and tends to identify the case early. Further implementation studies are needed to fill the knowledge gap on this medical service model among MSM and other target populations.

Use of HIV Recency Assays for HIV Incidence Estimation and Other Surveillance Use Cases: Systematic Review.

BackgroundHIV assays designed to detect recent infection, also known as “recency assays,” are often used to estimate HIV incidence in a specific country, region, or subpopulation, alone or as part of recent infection testing algorithms (RITAs). Recently, many countries and organizations have become interested in using recency assays within case surveillance systems and routine HIV testing services to measure other indicators beyond incidence, generally referred to as “non-incidence surveillance use cases.”ObjectiveThis review aims to identify published evidence that can be used to validate methodological approaches to recency-based incidence estimation and non-incidence use cases. The evidence identified through this review will be used in the forthcoming technical guidance by the World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) on the use of HIV recency assays for identification of epidemic trends, whether for HIV incidence estimation or non-incidence indicators of recency.MethodsTo identify the best methodological and field implementation practices for the use of recency assays to estimate HIV incidence and trends in recent infections for specific populations or geographic areas, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to (1) understand the use of recency testing for surveillance in programmatic and laboratory settings, (2) review methodologies for implementing recency testing for both incidence estimation and non-incidence use cases, and (3) assess the field performance characteristics of commercially available recency assays.ResultsAmong the 167 documents included in the final review, 91 (54.5%) focused on assay or algorithm performance or methodological descriptions, with high-quality evidence of accurate age- and sex-disaggregated HIV incidence estimation at national or regional levels in general population settings, but not at finer geographic levels for prevention prioritization. The remaining 76 (45.5%) described the field use of incidence assays including field-derived incidence (n=45), non-incidence (n=25), and both incidence and non-incidence use cases (n=6). The field use of incidence assays included integrating RITAs into routine surveillance and assisting with molecular genetic analyses, but evidence was generally weaker or only reported on what was done, without validation data or findings related to effectiveness of using non-incidence indicators calculated through the use of recency assays as a proxy for HIV incidence.ConclusionsHIV recency assays have been widely validated for estimating HIV incidence in age- and sex-specific populations at national and subnational regional levels; however, there is a lack of evidence validating the accuracy and effectiveness of using recency assays to identify epidemic trends in non-incidence surveillance use cases. More research is needed to validate the use of recency assays within HIV testing services, to ensure findings can be accurately interpreted to guide prioritization of public health programming.

Experiences and lessons learned from the real-world implementation of an HIV recent infection testing algorithm in three routine service-delivery settings in Kenya and Zimbabwe

IntroductionTesting for recent HIV infection can distinguish recently acquired infection from long-standing infections. Given current interest in the implementation of recent infection testing algorithms (RITA), we report our experiences in implementing a RITA in three pilot studies and highlight important issues to consider when conducting recency testing in routine settings.MethodsWe applied a RITA, incorporating a limited antigen (LAg) avidity assay, in different routine HIV service-delivery settings in 2018: antenatal care clinics in Siaya County, Kenya, HIV testing and counselling facilities in Nairobi, Kenya, and female sex workers clinics in Zimbabwe. Discussions were conducted with study coordinators, laboratory leads, and facility-based stakeholders to evaluate experiences and lessons learned in relation to implementing recency testing.ResultsIn Siaya County 10/426 (2.3%) of women testing HIV positive were classified as recent, compared to 46/530 (8.7%) of women and men in Nairobi and 33/313 (10.5%) of female sex workers in Zimbabwe. Across the study setting, we observed differences in acceptance, transport and storage of dried blood spot (DBS) or venous blood samples. For example, the acceptance rate when testing venous blood was 11% lower than when using DBS. Integrating our study into existing services ensured a quick start of the study and kept the amount of additional resources required low. From a laboratory perspective, the LAg avidity assay was initially difficult to operationalise, but developing a network of laboratories and experts to work together helped to improve this. A challenge that was not overcome was the returning of RITA test results to clients. This was due to delays in laboratory testing, the need for multiple test results to satisfy the RITA, difficulties in aligning clinic visits, and participants opting not to return for test results.ConclusionWe completed three pilot studies using HIV recency testing based on a RITA in Kenya and Zimbabwe. The main lessons we learned were related to sample collection and handling, LAg avidity assay performance, integration into existing services and returning of test results to participants. Our real-world experience could provide helpful guidance to people currently working on the implementation of HIV recency testing in sub-Saharan Africa.

Identifying major drivers of incident HIV infection using recent infection testing algorithms (RITAs) to precisely inform targeted prevention

BackgroundRecent infection testing algorithms (RITAs) incorporating clinical information with the HIV recency assay have been proven to accurately classify recent infection. However, little evidence exists on whether RITAs would help in precisely identifying major drivers of the ongoing HIV epidemic. MethodsHIV recency test results and clinical information were collected from 1152 newly diagnosed HIV cases between 2015 and 2017 in Dehong prefecture of Yunnan province, and the efficacy of four different RITAs in identifying risk factors for new HIV infection was compared. ResultsRITA 1 uses the recency test only. RITA 2 and RITA 3 combine the recency test with CD4+ T cell count and viral load (VL), respectively. RITA 4 combines both CD4+ T cell count and VL. All RITAs identified the MSM group and young people between 15 and 24 years as risk factors for incident HIV infection. RITA 3 and RITA 4 further identified the Dai ethnic minority as a risk factor, which had not been identified before when only the HIV recency test was used. ConclusionsBy comparing different RITAs, we determined that greater accuracy in classifying recent HIV infection could help elucidate major drivers impacting the ongoing epidemic and thus inform targeted interventions.

Recent HIV infection testing algorithms

Recent HIV infection testing algorithms

Evaluation of an HIV recent infection testing algorithm with serological assays among men who have sex with men in Mexico

BackgroundHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV) incidence should be calculated in cross-sectional studies using recent infection testing algorithms (RITA) that consider clinical variables and serological test results such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and dried blood spot (DBS) analysis. MethodsThe correlation between serum samples and DBS was evaluated using two commercial ELISA kits: SediaTM BED HIV-1 Incidence EIA (BED-Sedia) and Maxim HIV-1 Limiting Antigen Avidity (LAg-Avidity). Eight different RITAs were developed; all of them included serological assays. A combination of the variables viral load, antiretroviral therapy (ART) and CD4 count was used to build the RITAs. The sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, predictive positive value, predictive negative value, false recent rate (FRR) and false long-term rate were evaluated. ResultsThe correlations between serum samples and DBS were 0.990 and 0.867 for BED-Sedia and LAg-avidity, respectively. Using only serological assays, the Youden index was higher for LAg-avidity than BED-Sedia (82.1–83.0% versus 69.2–69.6%). The best RITA was ART-serology, which showed a Youden index of 91.2–93.9% and FRR of 1.8–2.2%. ConclusionsUsing DBS samples to determine HIV incidence is a good tool for epidemiological surveillance. The RITA that included ART and serological tests (BED-Sedia or LAg-avidity) showed the highest sensitivity and specificity and a low FRR.

A comparison of self-report and antiretroviral detection to inform estimates of antiretroviral therapy coverage, viral load suppression and HIV incidence in Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa

BackgroundAccurately identifying individuals who are on antiretroviral therapy (ART) is important to determine ART coverage and proportion on ART who are virally suppressed. ART is also included in recent infection testing algorithms used to estimate incidence. We compared estimates of ART coverage, viral load suppression rates and HIV incidence using ART self-report and detection of antiretroviral (ARV) drugs and we identified factors associated with discordance between the methods.MethodsCross-sectional population-based survey in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Individuals 15–59 years were eligible. Interviews included questions about ARV use. Rapid HIV testing was performed at the participants’ home. Blood specimens were collected for ARV detection, LAg-Avidity HIV incidence testing and viral load quantification in HIV-positive individuals. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify socio-demographic covariates associated with discordance between self-reported ART and ARV detection.ResultsOf the 5649 individuals surveyed, 1423 were HIV-positive. Median age was 34 years and 76.3% were women. ART coverage was estimated at 51.4% (95%CI:48.5–54.3), 53.1% (95%CI:50.2–55.9) and 56.1% (95%CI:53.5–58.8) using self-reported ART, ARV detection and both methods combined (classified as ART exposed if ARV detected and/or ART reported) respectively. ART coverage estimates using the 3 methods were fairly similar within sex and age categories except in individuals aged 15–19 years: 33.3% (95%CI:23.3–45.2), 33.8% (95%CI:23.9–45.4%) and 44.3% (95%CI:39.3–46.7) using self-reported ART, ARV detection and both methods combined. Viral suppression below 1000cp/mL in individuals on ART was estimated at 89.8% (95%CI:87.3–91.9), 93.1% (95%CI:91.0–94.8) and 88.7% (95%CI:86.2–90.7) using self-reported ART, ARV detection and both methods combined respectively. HIV incidence was estimated at 1.4 (95%CI:0.8–2.0) new cases/100 person-years when employing no measure of ARV use, 1.1/100PY (95%CI:0.6–1.7) using self-reported ART, and 1.2/100PY (95%CI:0.7–1.7) using ARV detection. In multivariate analyses, individuals aged 15–19 years had a higher risk of discordance on measures of ARV exposure (aOR:9.4; 95%CI:3.9–22.8), while migrants had a lower risk (aOR:0.3; 95%CI:0.1–0.6).ConclusionsIn KwaZulu-Natal, the method of identifying ARV use had little impact on estimates of ART coverage, viral suppression rate and HIV incidence. However, discordant results were more common in younger individuals. This may skew estimates of ART coverage and viral suppression, particularly in adolescent surveys.

Seroconverting Blood Donors as a Resource for Characterising and Optimising Recent Infection Testing Algorithms for Incidence Estimation

IntroductionBiomarker-based cross-sectional incidence estimation requires a Recent Infection Testing Algorithm (RITA) with an adequately large mean recency duration, to achieve reasonable survey counts, and a low false-recent rate, to minimise exposure to further bias and imprecision. Estimating these characteristics requires specimens from individuals with well-known seroconversion dates or confirmed long-standing infection. Specimens with well-known seroconversion dates are typically rare and precious, presenting a bottleneck in the development of RITAs.MethodsThe mean recency duration and a ‘false-recent rate’ are estimated from data on seroconverting blood donors. Within an idealised model for the dynamics of false-recent results, blood donor specimens were used to characterise RITAs by a new method that maximises the likelihood of cohort-level recency classifications, rather than modelling individual sojourn times in recency.ResultsFor a range of assumptions about the false-recent results (0% to 20% of biomarker response curves failing to reach the threshold distinguishing test-recent and test-non-recent infection), the mean recency duration of the Vironostika-LS ranged from 154 (95% CI: 96–231) to 274 (95% CI: 234–313) days in the South African donor population (n = 282), and from 145 (95% CI: 67–226) to 252 (95% CI: 194–308) days in the American donor population (n = 106). The significance of gender and clade on performance was rejected (p−value = 10%), and utility in incidence estimation appeared comparable to that of a BED-like RITA. Assessment of the Vitros-LS (n = 108) suggested potentially high false-recent rates.DiscussionThe new method facilitates RITA characterisation using widely available specimens that were previously overlooked, at the cost of possible artefacts. While accuracy and precision are insufficient to provide estimates suitable for incidence surveillance, a low-cost approach for preliminary assessments of new RITAs has been demonstrated. The Vironostika-LS and Vitros-LS warrant further analysis to provide greater precision of estimates.