Impact and cost-effectiveness of the national scale-up of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among female sex workers in South Africa: a modelling analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In 2016, South Africa (SA) initiated a national programme to scale-up pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among female sex workers (FSWs), with ∼20,000 PrEP initiations among FSWs (∼14% of FSW) by 2020. We evaluated the impact and cost-effectiveness of this programme, including future scale-up scenarios and the potential detrimental impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A compartmental HIV transmission model for SA was adapted to include PrEP. Using estimates on self-reported PrEP adherence from a national study of FSW (67.7%) and the Treatment and Prevention for FSWs (TAPS) PrEP demonstration study in SA (80.8%), we down-adjusted TAPS estimates for the proportion of FSWs with detectable drug levels (adjusted range: 38.0-70.4%). The model stratified FSW by low (undetectable drug; 0% efficacy) and high adherence (detectable drug; 79.9%; 95% CI: 67.2-87.6% efficacy). FSWs can transition between adherence levels, with lower loss-to-follow-up among highly adherent FSWs (aHR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.40-0.85; TAPS data). The model was calibrated to monthly data on the national scale-up of PrEP among FSWs over 2016-2020, including reductions in PrEP initiations during 2020. The model projected the impact of the current programme (2016-2020) and the future impact (2021-2040) at current coverage or if initiation and/or retention are doubled. Using published cost data, we assessed the cost-effectiveness (healthcare provider perspective; 3% discount rate; time horizon 2016-2040) of the current PrEP provision. RESULTS: Calibrated to national data, model projections suggest that 2.1% of HIV-negative FSWs were currently on PrEP in 2020, with PrEP preventing 0.45% (95% credibility interval, 0.35-0.57%) of HIV infections among FSWs over 2016-2020 or 605 (444-840) infections overall. Reductions in PrEP initiations in 2020 possibly reduced infections averted by 18.57% (13.99-23.29). PrEP is cost-saving, with $1.42 (1.03-1.99) of ART costs saved per dollar spent on PrEP. Going forward, existing coverage of PrEP will avert 5,635 (3,572-9,036) infections by 2040. However, if PrEP initiation and retention doubles, then PrEP coverage increases to 9.9% (8.7-11.6%) and impact increases 4.3 times with 24,114 (15,308-38,107) infections averted by 2040. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings advocate for the expansion of PrEP to FSWs throughout SA to maximize its impact. This should include strategies to optimize retention and should target women in contact with FSW services.

The impact of disruptions due to COVID-19 on HIV transmission and control among men who have sex with men in China.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic is impacting HIV care globally, with gaps in HIV treatment expected to increase HIV transmission and HIV-related mortality. We estimated how COVID-19-related disruptions could impact HIV transmission and mortality among men who have sex with men (MSM) in four cities in China, over a one- and five-year time horizon. METHODS: Regional data from China indicated that the number of MSM undergoing facility-based HIV testing reduced by 59% during the COVID-19 pandemic, alongside reductions in ART initiation (34%), numbers of all sexual partners (62%) and consistency of condom use (25%), but initial data indicated no change in viral suppression. A mathematical model of HIV transmission/treatment among MSM was used to estimate the impact of disruptions on HIV infections/HIV-related deaths. Disruption scenarios were assessed for their individual and combined impact over one and five years for 3/4/6-month disruption periods, starting from 1 January 2020. RESULTS: Our model predicted new HIV infections and HIV-related deaths would be increased most by disruptions to viral suppression, with 25% reductions (25% virally suppressed MSM stop taking ART) for a three-month period increasing HIV infections by 5% to 14% over one year and deaths by 7% to 12%. Observed reductions in condom use increased HIV infections by 5% to 14% but had minimal impact (<1%) on deaths. Smaller impacts on infections and deaths (<3%) were seen for disruptions to facility HIV testing and ART initiation, but reduced partner numbers resulted in 11% to 23% fewer infections and 0.4% to 1.0% fewer deaths. Longer disruption periods (4/6 months) amplified the impact of disruption scenarios. When realistic disruptions were modelled simultaneously, an overall decrease in new HIV infections occurred over one year (3% to 17%), but not for five years (1% increase to 4% decrease), whereas deaths mostly increased over one year (1% to 2%) and five years (1.2 increase to 0.3 decrease). CONCLUSIONS: The overall impact of COVID-19 on new HIV infections and HIV-related deaths is dependent on the nature, scale and length of the various disruptions. Resources should be directed to ensuring levels of viral suppression and condom use are maintained to mitigate any adverse effects of COVID-19-related disruption on HIV transmission and control among MSM in China.

Assessing the Potential Impact of Disruptions Due to COVID-19 on HIV Among Key and Lower-Risk Populations in the Largest Cities of Cameroon and Benin.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic indirectly impacts HIV epidemiology in Central/West Africa. We estimated the potential impact of COVID-19-related disruptions to HIV prevention/treatment services and sexual partnerships on HIV incidence and HIV-related deaths among key populations including female sex workers (FSW), their clients, men who have sex with men, and overall. SETTING: Yaoundé (Cameroon) and Cotonou (Benin). METHODS: We used mathematical models of HIV calibrated to city population-specific and risk population-specific demographic/behavioral/epidemic data. We estimated the relative change in 1-year HIV incidence and HIV-related deaths for various disruption scenarios of HIV prevention/treatment services and decreased casual/commercial partnerships, compared with a scenario without COVID-19. RESULTS: A 50% reduction in condom use in all partnerships over 6 months would increase 1-year HIV incidence by 39%, 42%, 31%, and 23% among men who have sex with men, FSW, clients, and overall in Yaoundé, respectively, and 69%, 49%, and 23% among FSW, clients, and overall, respectively, in Cotonou. Combining a 6-month interruption of ART initiation and 50% reduction in HIV prevention/treatment use would increase HIV incidence by 50% and HIV-related deaths by 20%. This increase in HIV infections would be halved by a simultaneous 50% reduction in casual and commercial partnerships. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in condom use after COVID-19 would increase infections among key populations disproportionately, particularly FSW in Cotonou, who need uninterrupted condom provision. Disruptions in HIV prevention/treatment services have the biggest impacts on HIV infections and deaths overall, only partially mitigated by equal reductions in casual/commercial sexual partnerships. Maintaining ART provision must be prioritized to minimize short-term excess HIV-related deaths.

Exploratory comparison of Healthcare costs and benefits of the UK's Covid-19 response with four European countries.

BACKGROUND: In responding to Covid-19, governments have tried to balance protecting health while minimizing gross domestic product (GDP) losses. We compare health-related net benefit (HRNB) and GDP losses associated with government responses of the UK, Ireland, Germany, Spain and Sweden from UK healthcare payer perspective. METHODS: We compared observed cases, hospitalizations and deaths under 'mitigation' to modelled events under 'no mitigation' to 20 July 2020. We thus calculated healthcare costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), and HRNB at £20,000/QALY saved by each country. On per population (i.e. per capita) basis, we compared HRNB with forecast reductions in 2020 GDP growth (overall or compared with Sweden as minimal mitigation country) and qualitatively and quantitatively described government responses. RESULTS: The UK saved 3.17 (0.32-3.65) million QALYs, £33 (8-38) billion healthcare costs and £1416 (220-1637) HRNB per capita at £20,000/QALY. Per capita, this is comparable to £1455 GDP loss using Sweden as comparator and offsets 46.1 (7.1-53.2)% of total £3075 GDP loss. Germany, Spain, and Sweden had greater HRNB per capita. These also offset a greater percentage of total GDP losses per capita. Ireland fared worst on both measures. Countries with more mask wearing, testing, and population susceptibility had better outcomes. Highest stringency responses did not appear to have best outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our exploratory analysis indicates the benefit of government Covid-19 responses may outweigh their economic costs. The extent that HRNB offset economic losses appears to relate to population characteristics, testing levels, and mask wearing, rather than response stringency.