Leveraging the HIV response to strengthen pandemic preparedness

The COVID-19 pandemic and the expectation of future pandemic threats have generated a global dialogue on strengthening pandemic preparedness and response (PPR). Thus far, this dialogue has largely failed to fully consider the critical role that established, disease-specific programs played in national and regional COVID-19 responses, and the potential for these programs to contribute to stronger pandemic preparedness for the future. The HIV response is an important example of a global health initiative that is already making substantial contributions to PPR. Both the infrastructure and core principles of the HIV response have much to contribute towards pandemic preparedness that is more effective and equitable than seen in the response to COVID-19. This review examines how HIV-related resources and principles can support communities and countries in being better prepared for emerging disease threats, with a specific focus on evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing on the current literature, the review explores the clear, multi-faceted intersection between the HIV response and the central elements of pandemic preparedness in areas including surveillance;supply chain;primary care;health care workforce;community engagement;biomedical research;universal access without discrimination;political leadership;governance;and financing. There are many opportunities to be more strategic and purposeful in leveraging HIV programs and approaches for preparedness. Avoiding the longstanding temptation in global health to create new siloes, PPR initiatives, including the new Pandemic Fund at the World Bank, should invest in and build out from existing programs that are already making health systems more inclusive and resilient, including the global response to HIV.

"It was like you were being literally punished for getting sick": formerly incarcerated people's perspectives on liberty restrictions during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has greatly impacted the health of incarcerated individuals in the US. The goal of this study was to examine perspectives of recently incarcerated individuals on greater restrictions on liberty to mitigate COVID-19 transmission. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured phone interviews from August through October 2021 with 21 people who had been incarcerated in Bureau of Prisons (BOP) facilities during the pandemic. Transcripts were coded and analyzed, using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Many facilities implemented universal "lockdowns," with time out of the cell often limited to one hour per day, with participants reporting not being able to meet all essential needs such as showers and calling loved ones. Several study participants reported that repurposed spaces and tents created for quarantine and isolation provided "unlivable conditions." Participants reported receiving no medical attention while in isolation, and staff using spaces designated for disciplinary purposes (e.g., solitary housing units) for public health isolation purposes. This resulted in the conflation of isolation and discipline, which discouraged symptom reporting. Some participants felt guilty over potentially causing another lockdown by not reporting their symptoms. Programming was frequently stopped or curtailed and communication with the outside was limited. Some participants relayed that staff threatened to punish noncompliance with masking and testing. Liberty restrictions were purportedly rationalized by staff with the idea that incarcerated people should not expect freedoms, while those incarcerated blamed staff for bringing COVID-19 into the facility. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlighted how actions by staff and administrators decreased the legitimacy of the facilities' COVID-19 response and were sometimes counterproductive. Legitimacy is key in building trust and obtaining cooperation with otherwise unpleasant but necessary restrictive measures. To prepare for future outbreaks facilities must consider the impact of liberty-restricting decisions on residents and build legitimacy for these decisions by communicating justifications to the extent possible.

Financing and Delivering Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) to End the HIV Epidemic.

The U.S. has the tools to end the HIV epidemic, but progress has stagnated. A major gap in U.S. efforts to address HIV is the under-utilization of medications that can virtually eliminate acquisition of the virus, known as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). This document proposes a financing and delivery system to unlock broad access to PrEP for those most vulnerable to HIV acquisition and bring an end to the HIV epidemic.

INTRODUCTION Disrupting the Status Quo: Building Equitable Access to HIV PrEP in the US through Innovative Financing.

This special edition of JLME centers on a novel proposal for a national PrEP access program with the potential to break through a failed status quo.

A Human Rights Framework for Advancing the Standard of Medical Care for Incarcerated People in the United States in the Time of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the lack of resources and oversight that hinders medical care for incarcerated people in the United States. The US Supreme Court has held that "deliberate indifference" to "serious medical needs" violates the Constitution. But this legal standard does not assure the consistent provision of health care services. This leads the United States to fall behind European nations that define universal standards of care grounded in principles of human rights and the ideal of equivalence that incarcerated and non-incarcerated people are entitled to the same health care. In this paper, we review a diverse legal and policy literature and undertake a conceptual analysis of policy issues related to the standard of care in correctional health; we then describe a framework for moving incrementally closer toward a universal standard. The expansion of Medicaid funding and benefits to corrections facilities, alongside a system of comprehensive and enforceable external oversight, would meaningfully raise the standard of care. Although these changes on their own will not resolve all of the thorny health problems posed by mass incarceration, they present a tangible opportunity to move closer to the human rights ideal.

Perceived Interruptions to HIV Prevention and Treatment Services Associated With COVID-19 for Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men in 20 Countries.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus pandemic has necessitated a range of population-based measures to stem the spread of infection. These measures may be associated with disruptions to other health services including for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) at risk for or living with HIV. Here, we assess the relationship between stringency of COVID-19 control measures and interruptions to HIV prevention and treatment services for MSM. SETTING: Data for this study were collected between April 16, 2020, and May 24, 2020, as part of a COVID-19 Disparities Survey implemented by the gay social networking app, Hornet. Pandemic control measures were quantified using the Oxford Government Response Tracker Stringency Index: each country received a score (0-100) based on the number and strictness of 9 indicators related to restrictions, closures, and travel bans. METHODS: We used a multilevel mixed-effects generalized linear model with Poisson distribution to assess the association between stringency of pandemic control measures and access to HIV services. RESULTS: A total of 10,654 MSM across 20 countries were included. Thirty-eight percent (3992/10,396) reported perceived interruptions to in-person testing, 55% (5178/9335) interruptions to HIV self-testing, 56% (5171/9173) interruptions to pre-exposure prophylaxis, and 10% (990/9542) interruptions to condom access. For every 10-point increase in stringency, there was a 3% reduction in the prevalence of perceived access to in-person testing (aPR: 0·97, 95% CI: [0·96 to 0·98]), a 6% reduction in access to self-testing (aPR: 0·94, 95% CI: [0·93 to 0·95]), and a 5% reduction in access to pre-exposure prophylaxis (aPR: 0·95, 95% CI: [0·95 to 0·97]). Among those living with HIV, 20% (218/1105) were unable to access their provider; 65% (820/1254) reported being unable to refill their treatment prescription remotely. CONCLUSIONS: More stringent responses were associated with decreased perceived access to services. These results support the need for increasing emphasis on innovative strategies in HIV-related diagnostic, prevention, and treatment services to minimize service interruptions during this and potential future waves of COVID-19 for gay men and other MSM at risk for HIV acquisition and transmission.

Rapid, application-based survey to characterise the impacts of COVID-19 on LGBTQ+ communities around the world: an observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Emerging evidence indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic, and the responses it has generated, have had disproportionate impacts on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) communities. This study seeks to build on existing information and provide regional insight. METHODS: In response, a cross-sectional survey was administered to a global sample of LGBTQ+ individuals (n=13 358) between 16 April and 20 May 2020 via the social networking application Hornet. The survey contained questions that characterise the impact of COVID-19 and associated mitigation strategies on economics, employment, mental health and access to healthcare. RESULTS: 5191 (43.9%) individuals indicated they were somewhat, slightly or unable to meet basic needs with their current income, while 2827 (24.1%) and 4710 (40.1%) felt physically or emotionally unsafe in their living environment, respectively. 2202 individuals (24.7%) stated they are at risk for losing health insurance coverage. 2685 (22.7%) persons reported having skipped or cut meals as there was not enough money. CONCLUSION: Many LGBTQ+persons who responded reported adverse consequences to mental health, economics, interruptions to care and lack of support from their government. This data is part of ongoing analyses but accentuates the unique needs of LGBTQ+ communities that will require targeted, ameliorative approaches.

The persistent and evolving HIV epidemic in American men who have sex with men.

Men who have sex with men (MSM) in the USA were the first population to be identified with AIDS and continue to be at very high risk of HIV acquisition. We did a systematic literature search to identify the factors that explain the reasons for the ongoing epidemic in this population, using a social-ecological perspective. Common features of the HIV epidemic in American MSM include role versatility and biological, individual, and social and structural factors. The high-prevalence networks of some racial and ethnic minority men are further concentrated because of assortative mixing, adverse life experiences (including high rates of incarceration), and avoidant behaviour because of negative interactions with the health-care system. Young MSM have additional risks for HIV because their impulse control is less developed and they are less familiar with serostatus and other risk mitigation discussions. They might benefit from prevention efforts that use digital technologies, which they often use to meet partners and obtain health-related information. Older MSM remain at risk of HIV and are the largest population of US residents with chronic HIV, requiring culturally responsive programmes that address longer-term comorbidities. Transgender MSM are an understudied population, but emerging data suggest that some are at great risk of HIV and require specifically tailored information on HIV prevention. In the current era of pre-exposure prophylaxis and the undetectable equals untransmittable campaign, training of health-care providers to create culturally competent programmes for all MSM is crucial, since the use of antiretrovirals is foundational to optimising HIV care and prevention. Effective control of the HIV epidemic among all American MSM will require scaling up programmes that address their common vulnerabilities, but are sufficiently nuanced to address the specific sociocultural, structural, and behavioural issues of diverse subgroups.

Increasing Black, Indigenous and People of Color participation in clinical trials through community engagement and recruitment goal establishment.

Longstanding social and economic inequities elevate health risks and vulnerabilities for Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) communities. Engagement of BIPOC communities in infectious disease research is a critical component in efforts to increase vaccine confidence, acceptability, and uptake of future approved products. Recent data highlight the relative absence of BIPOC communities in vaccine clinical trials. Intentional and effective community engagement methods are needed to improve BIPOC inclusion. We describe the methods utilized for the successful enrollment of BIPOC participants in the U.S. Government (USG)-funded COVID-19 Prevention Network (CoVPN)-sponsored vaccine efficacy trials and analyze the demographic and enrollment data across the efficacy trials to inform future efforts to ensure inclusive participation. Across the four USG-funded COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials for which data are available, 47% of participants enrolled at CoVPN sites in the US were BIPOC. White enrollment outpaced enrollment of BIPOC participants throughout the accrual period, requiring the implementation of strategies to increase diverse and inclusive enrollment. Trials opening later benefitted considerably from strengthened community engagement efforts, and greater and more diverse volunteer registry records. Despite robust fiscal resources and a longstanding collaborative and collective effort, enrollment of White persons outpaced that of BIPOC communities. With appropriate resources, commitment and community engagement expertise, the equitable enrollment of BIPOC individuals can be achieved. To ensure this goal, intentional efforts are needed, including an emphasis on diversity of enrollment in clinical trials, establishment of enrollment goals, ongoing robust community engagement, conducting population-specific trials, and research to inform best practices.

Importance of non-pharmaceutical interventions in lowering the viral inoculum to reduce susceptibility to infection by SARS-CoV-2 and potentially disease severity.

Adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions to prevent the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been highly variable across settings, particularly in the USA. In this Personal View, we review data supporting the importance of the viral inoculum (the dose of viral particles from an infected source over time) in increasing the probability of infection in respiratory, gastrointestinal, and sexually transmitted viral infections in humans. We also review the available evidence linking the relationship of the viral inoculum to disease severity. Non-pharmaceutical interventions might reduce the susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection by reducing the viral inoculum when there is exposure to an infectious source. Data from physical sciences research suggest that masks protect the wearer by filtering virus from external sources, and others by reducing expulsion of virus by the wearer. Social distancing, handwashing, and improved ventilation also reduce the exposure amount of viral particles from an infectious source. Maintaining and increasing non-pharmaceutical interventions can help to quell SARS-CoV-2 as we enter the second year of the pandemic. Finally, we argue that even as safe and effective vaccines are being rolled out, non-pharmaceutical interventions will continue to play an essential role in suppressing SARS-CoV-2 transmission until equitable and widespread vaccine administration has been completed.

Overview of the epidemiological conditions of HIV among key populations in Africa.

INTRODUCTION: Despite extraordinary progress in HIV treatment coverage and expanding access to HIV prevention services and that multiple African countries are on track in their efforts to reach 90-90-90 goals, the epidemic continues to persist, with prevalence and incidence rates too high in some parts of the continent to achieve epidemic control. While data sources are improving, and research studies on key populations in specific contexts have improved, work on understanding the HIV burdens and barriers to services for these populations remains sparse, uneven and absent altogether in multiple settings. More data have become available in the last several years, and data published in 2010 or more recently are reviewed here for each key population. This scoping review assesses the current epidemiology of HIV among key populations in Africa and the social and political environments that contribute to the epidemic, both of which suggest that without significant policy reform, these epidemics will likely continue. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Across Africa, the HIV epidemic is most severe among key populations including women and men who sell or trade sex, men who have sex with men, people who inject drugs, transgender women who have sex with men and prisoners and detainees. These groups account for the majority of new infections in West and Central Africa, and an estimated 25% of new infections in East and Southern Africa, despite representing relatively small proportions of those populations. The HIV literature in Africa emphasizes that despite significant health needs, key populations experience barriers to accessing services within the healthcare and legal justice systems. Current shortcomings of surveillance systems in enumerating key populations impact the way funding mechanisms and resources are allocated and distributed. Adapting more equitable and epidemiologically sound frameworks will be necessary for current and future HIV programming investments. CONCLUSIONS: Through this review, the available literature on HIV epidemiology among key populations in Africa brings to light a number of surveillance, programmatic and research gaps. For many communities, interventions targeting the health and security conditions continue to be minimal. Compelling evidence suggests that sweeping policy and programmatic changes are needed to effectively tackle the persistent HIV epidemic in Africa.

Address Exacerbated Health Disparities and Risks to LGBTQ+ Individuals during COVID-19

As of August 12, 2020, there are over 20 million confirmed cases of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) worldwide with over 744,000 deaths.1 Due to existing disparities in health outcomes, the consequences of this pandemic for LGBTQ+ individuals could be magnified in scope and severity.2 Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM), particularly those who inhabit multiple minority identities (that is, racial/ethnic minorities, immigrants), are already at greater risk for suicide, HIV, and unemployment, and commonly face systematic, institutional discrimination in the form of criminalization and other human rights violations.3 Vulnerable subgroups, such as unstably housed or informally employed LGBTQ+ individuals, may struggle to practice social distancing and prescribed sanitation measures. The recommendations presented here are data-driven and informed by a cross-sectional survey implemented by the free gay social networking app, Hornet, from April 16 to May 4, 2020. Hornet has over 25 million global users, and over 4,000 users from more than 150 countries completed this survey.

COVID-19 vaccine prioritization of incarcerated people relative to other vulnerable groups: An analysis of state plans.

BACKGROUND: Carceral facilities are epicenters of the COVID-19 pandemic, placing incarcerated people at an elevated risk of COVID-19 infection. Due to the initial limited availability of COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, all states have developed allocation plans that outline a phased distribution. This study uses document analysis to compare the relative prioritization of incarcerated people, correctional staff, and other groups at increased risk of COVID-19 infection and morbidity. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a document analysis of the vaccine dissemination plans of all 50 US states and the District of Columbia using a triple-coding method. Documents included state COVID-19 vaccination plans and supplemental materials on vaccine prioritization from state health department websites as of December 31, 2020. We found that 22% of states prioritized incarcerated people in Phase 1, 29% of states in Phase 2, and 2% in Phase 3, while 47% of states did not explicitly specify in which phase people who are incarcerated will be eligible for vaccination. Incarcerated people were consistently not prioritized in Phase 1, while other vulnerable groups who shared similar environmental risk received this early prioritization. States' plans prioritized in Phase 1: prison and jail workers (49%), law enforcement (63%), seniors (65+ years, 59%), and long-term care facility residents (100%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that states' COVID-19 vaccine allocation plans do not prioritize incarcerated people and provide little to no guidance on vaccination protocols if they fall under other high-risk categories that receive earlier priority. Deprioritizing incarcerated people for vaccination misses a crucial opportunity for COVID-19 mitigation. It also raises ethical and equity concerns. As states move forward with their vaccine distribution, further work must be done to prioritize ethical allocation and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines to incarcerated people.

The potential effect of COVID-19-related disruptions on HIV incidence and HIV-related mortality among men who have sex with men in the USA: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, men who have sex with men (MSM) in the USA have reported similar or fewer sexual partners and reduced HIV testing and care access compared with before the pandemic. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use has also declined. We aimed to quantify the potential effect of COVID-19 on HIV incidence and HIV-related mortality among US MSM. METHODS: We used a calibrated, deterministic, compartmental HIV transmission model for MSM in Baltimore (MD, USA) and available data on COVID-19-related disruptions to HIV services to predict effects of reductions in sexual partners (0%, 25%, 50%), condom use (5%), HIV testing (20%), viral suppression (10%), PrEP initiations (72%), PrEP adherence (9%), and antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiations (50%). In our main analysis, we modelled disruptions due to COVID-19 starting Jan 1, 2020, and lasting 6 months. We estimated the median change in cumulative new HIV infections and HIV-related deaths among MSM over 1 and 5 years, compared with a base case scenario without COVID-19-related disruptions. FINDINGS: A 25% reduction in sexual partners for 6 months among MSM in Baltimore, without HIV service changes, could reduce new HIV infections by median 12·2% (95% credible interval 11·7 to 12·8) over 1 year and median 3·0% (2·6 to 3·4) over 5 years. In the absence of changes in sexual behaviour, the 6-month estimated reductions in condom use, HIV testing, viral suppression, PrEP initiations, PrEP adherence, and ART initiations combined are predicted to increase new HIV infections by median 10·5% (5·8 to 16·5) over 1 year, and by median 3·5% (2·1 to 5·4) over 5 years. Disruptions to ART initiations and viral suppression are estimated to substantially increase HIV-related deaths (ART initiations by median 1·7% [0·8 to 3·2], viral suppression by median 9·5% [5·2 to 15·9]) over 1 year, with smaller proportional increases over 5 years. The other individual disruptions (to HIV testing, PrEP and condom use, PrEP initiation, and partner numbers) were estimated to have little effect on HIV-related deaths (<1% change over 1 or 5 years). A 25% reduction in sexual partnerships is estimated to offset the effect of the combined service disruptions on new HIV infections (change over 1 year: median -3·9% [-7·4 to 1·0]; over 5 years: median 0·0% [-0·9 to 1·4]), but not on HIV deaths (change over 1 year: 11·0% [6·2 to 17·7]; over 5 years: 2·6% [1·5 to 4·3]). INTERPRETATION: Maintaining access to ART and adherence support is of the utmost importance to maintain viral suppression and minimise excess HIV-related mortality due to COVID-19 restrictions in the USA, even if disruptions to services are accompanied by reductions in sexual partnerships. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.