No improvements in CD4 count at diagnosis in African patients in last decade
Can be accessed from: Gus Cairns
Published: 04 February 2015
A study by Harvard Medical School has found that the average
CD4 count in sub-Saharan African people who are diagnosed with HIV has not
risen since 2002. Neither has the average CD4 count on initiation of treatment,
which remains well below the AIDS-defining limit of 200 cells/mm3. The authors
call for far more active HIV testing and facilitated referral programmes, and
continued global financial support for HIV testing and treatment.
A second study of a number of different prevalence and
incidence surveys conducted by the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI)
among selected populations in the region shows that annual HIV incidence ranges
from zero to 19% according to the population studied, indicating that specific
groups should be the subject of testing and referral initiatives. Groups with
especially high incidence included the negative partners in sero-different
couples, female sex workers (FSWs), men who have sex with men (MSM), young
women in certain locations, and specific communities such as fisherfolk on Lake
Victoria. Equally, however, surveys of some similar groups in different
locations reported low incidence, showing that it may change rapidly and that
regular studies should track incidence hotspots.
It was notable that the incidence rate in most populations
with high rates fell two- to threefold after the first three months of being
included in an incidence survey, showing that clinical referral and monitoring
is itself a useful HIV prevention measure.
CD4 count at diagnosis and at start of treatment
The Harvard study looked at CD4 count on diagnosis and at
initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in 127 different studies covering
over half a million patients between 2002 and 2012. Only six studies looked at
CD4 count at both HIV diagnosis and ART initiation in the same patients.
It found that the average CD4 count at HIV diagnosis was 250
cells/mm3 in 2002 and 309 cells/mm3 in 2012. This increase – amounting to
a 5.8 cells cells/mm3 increase per year – was not statistically
significant.
The average CD4 count at ART initiation actually decreased
very slightly, from 152 cells/mm3 in 2002 to 140 cells/mm3 in 2012, well below
the AIDS-defining limit of 200 cells/mm3. This decrease was also not
significant. There was no change in CD4 count at initiation after the issue of
the World Health Organization’s 2009 treatment guidelines, which changed
the recommended CD4 count at which to start ART from 200 to 350 cells/mm3.
There were exceptions to these CD4 figures. When ART was
given to pregnant women for the prevention of mother-to-child transmission, the
CD4 count at diagnosis and at ART initiation were 395 and 313 cells/mm3
respectively.
More significantly in terms of general testing and treatment
policy, CD4 counts were a lot higher at both diagnosis and ART initiation in
so-called ‘active HIV screening’ programmes. This means initiatives
such as community-wide screening, community-based combination prevention
programmes that include testing, home-testing and home-based testing by
visiting health workers. In active programmes, CD4 counts at diagnosis and
initiation were 405 and 268 cells/mm3 respectively. However, only 3.3% of all
the people whose CD4 counts were included were involved in studies of such
programmes.
South Africa is the one country that had higher CD4 counts
on diagnosis in 2012 than 2002: its year-on-year increase in average CD4 count
at diagnosis of nearly 40 cells/mm3 a year would appear to be an endorsement of
that country’s HIV awareness strategy. However this has not been matched
by an increase in CD4 count at ART initiation, which at 123 cells/mm3 averaged
over the whole decade is the second-lowest among countries surveyed after
Ethiopia.
The researchers comment that there is a relative lack of
data post-2010, with only 14% of studies reporting figures from beyond that
year: this is because some multi-year studies do not report till the end, so
recent improvements in CD4 count at diagnosis and ART initiation could be
missed.
HIV prevalence studies
Meanwhile a series of observational studies conducted by
IAVI document extremely high HIV prevalence and incidence rates in some
populations and surprisingly low ones in others. IAVI runs a project called the
African HIV Prevention Partnership that conduct observational studies in different
parts of Africa to uncover populations in particular need of prevention
intervention. This is work preparatory to creating an African HIV Clinical
Research and Prevention Trials Network similar to HPTN in the US.
Their paper looks at three prevalence and ten incidence
studies in varied populations in the countries of Uganda, Rwanda, Kenya, Zambia
and South Africa.
In the prevalence studies, a variety of populations in
Uganda and Kenya were studied including rural communities, clinic attendees, a
random whole-area population sample, and in Nairobi female sex workers (FSWs)
and their clients.
Groups in which there was particularly high HIV prevalence
includes FSWs (20% - in their clients it was 7%), and divorced and widowed
people (as opposed to single or married ones), where prevalence was 28% in a
Kenyan study, and 22% in a Ugandan one. HIV was also more common in urban
versus rural populations: it was 9% urban versus 2% rural people in a Kenyan
study, and, in a Ugandan one, 16% versus 10% for people who lived near a
highway versus people whose homes were only accessible by foot.
Peak prevalence age was 30-34 in two studies (16.5% in
Uganda and 24% in FSWs) and in the non-FSW studies women had higher prevalence
than men (in women, 10% and 13% in two studies versus, in men, 5% and 9%).
Condom use, especially irregular use, was actually
associated with higher HIV prevalence than not using them at all, but possibly
because it was associated with casual sex. In Nairobi FSWs and clients,
prevalence was 17.5% in condom users versus 10% in non-users. In Masaka, Uganda
prevalence was 10% in people who never used condoms, and also in people who
used them more than half the time: but it was 15% in people who used them only
occasionally. Prevalence in people with one steady partner was lower (8-11%
across studies) than in people who had more than one (14-17%).
Genital ulcer disease (herpes, syphilis and the like - GUD)
were associated with 2.5 to four times the prevalence than in people who did
not have GUD.
HIV incidence studies – very high rates in some groups
But it was the incidence studies that found continuing high,
and in some cases extraordinarily high, rates of ongoing HIV infection in some
communities and groups – and low rates in seemingly similar ones.
One of the easiest and most important populations in which
to conduct incidence is serodiscordant couples. In most but not all studies of
serodiscordant couples annual HIV incidence was higher where the female partner
was the initially HIV-negative one. Very high rates were observed in Lusaka,
Zambia (9% a year in female partners, 7% in male) and Ndola in the same country
(11% in women and 6% in men).
The ‘real-life’ effect of placing the positive
partner on ART was documented in one study in Masaka, Uganda where annual HIV
incidence in serodiscordant couples was 4% in male partners and 5% in female
but only 1% in partners of either gender when the HIV-positive partner was on
ART.
In the latter case particularly, much of this continued HIV
infection may have come from outside the main relationship: IAVI genotyped all
viruses in the HIV positive partners and found that from 20% to 33% of the
infections in their studies came from someone other than the main partner, with
one exception on Uganda where there were no ‘unlinked’ infections.
Other groups in which very high incidence was found were
MSM, with annual incidence rates of 7% and 6% at two places in Kenya and 9.5%
at Rustenberg in South Africa; women in ‘peripheral communities', i.e.
irregular housing in Rustenburg (9%) and members of fishing communities in Lake
Victoria (10% in women in one Ugandan location and 5% in men).
And yet, at the same time, some groups with very high
prevalence did not have a high rate of ongoing HIV infection. Even though HIV
prevalence in Nairobi FSWs was high (see above), annual incidence was very low:
in rural communities in Masaka where HIV prevalence was 10%, ongoing HIV
incidence was so low in the general population that the team shifted their
incidence survey to serodiscordant couples and fishing communities. And in one
study in Kenya there were no infections observed within discordant couples at
all (this study is unpublished so there is as yet no explanation for this).
One striking and near-universal finding was that enrolment
into an HIV incidence study brought down incidence in itself. There were
astoundingly high HIV incidence rates among some people in the first three
months of their involvement in incidence studies: 15% and 19% in HIV-negative
women in Zambian serodiscordant couples, 16% in Kenyan MSM, 12% among women
with casual partners in South Africa. In all cases, although incidence remained
high, it fell 1.5 to 4-fold after the first three months of being in the
survey. This phenomenon has been seen in HIV prevention studies before and may
be due to regular monitoring and the attention and counselling of healthcare
workers.
HIV prevalence in sub-Saharan Africa has been in decline
throughout the period of these studies and access to ART has expanded hugely.
However what these two studies show is that the HIV epidemic is still very much
an ongoing one in some groups in Africa.
The IAVI writers comment that their findings "provide
valuable data for prevention trial design and conduct, prevention planning, and
service delivery," especially in key affected populations where there is
high HIV incidence "despite regular HIV testing and counselling."
References
Siedner MJ et al. Trends in CD4 count at presentation to
care and treatment initiation in sub-Saharan Africa, 2002-2013: a
meta-analysis. Clinical Infectious Diseases, e-pub ahead of print: pii:
ciu1137. 2014.
Kamali A et al. Creating an African clinical research and
prevention trials network: HIV prevalence, incidence and transmission. PLoS
One, Doi:10.1371/journal.pone. 0116100. 2015.
Paul Semugoma
MD. (MSM Technical
Expert - Health4Men | Anova Health Institute
| semugoma@anovahealth.co.za | Tel +27214472844 |
Fax +27214472887 | Mobile +27765705942)
Ivan Tom's Center
for Men's Health, Victoria Walk, Woodstock, Cape Town 7925
Web http://anovahealth.co.za/
http://www.health4men.co.za/|
Twitter @AnovaHealthSA
; @H4Mtop2btm |
Facebook Anova Health Institute : Health4men
Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteFinally a baseline is emerging.
Key populations that were originally missing as respondents for most African countries are getting mention. In this paper, note has been made of countries that are seeing spikes say, Uganda. It needs more than the laboratory and clinic to get CD4 count to an acceptable level. Hopefully the goal "undetectable" with its attendant structural needs will be easily implementable for most African economies. Human Rights and facilitating grass-root prevention need to be addressed quire-markedly.
The last decade (2004-2014) in a country like Uganda, had forms of Anti-HIV strategies that put effort behind ABC/ABC+, elimination of perinatal transmission, PEP and PrEP.
"Towards Zero," will need more than these. Prevention in all its presentation targeting all population groups and the way they experience sexuality has to come in the picture. Prevention practices for all population groups must be encouraged and facilitated. As someone who worked on a Prevention Programme in Africa up to 2011, am so looking forward to reading another report like this after the next decade.
Thanks for sharing,