Estimating the 'PrEP Gap': how implementation and access to PrEP differ between countries in Europe and Central Asia in 2019.

In 2019, only 14 European and Central Asian countries provided reimbursed HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Using EMIS-2017 data, we present the difference between self-reported use and expressed need for PrEP in individual countries and the European Union (EU). We estimate that 500,000 men who have sex with men in the EU cannot access PrEP, although they would be very likely to use it. PrEP's potential to eliminate HIV is currently unrealised by national healthcare systems.

HIV in Europe and Central Asia: progress in 2018 towards meeting the UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets.

In 2018, 52 of 55 European and Central Asian countries reported data against the UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets. Overall, 80% of people living with HIV (PLHIV) were diagnosed, of whom 64% received treatment and 86% treated were virally suppressed. Subregional outcomes varied: West (87%-91%-93%), Centre (83%-73%-75%) and East (76%-46%-78%). Overall, 43% of all PLHIV were virally suppressed; intensive efforts are needed to meet the 2020 target of 73%.

Can Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Direct-Acting Antiviral Treatment as Prevention Reverse the HCV Epidemic Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in the United Kingdom? Epidemiological and Modeling Insights.

BACKGROUND: We report on the hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemic among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United Kingdom and model its trajectory with or without scaled-up HCV direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). METHODS: A dynamic HCV transmission model among HIV-diagnosed MSM in the United Kingdom was calibrated to HCV prevalence (antibody [Ab] or RNA positive), incidence, and treatment from 2004 to 2011 among HIV-diagnosed MSM in the UK Collaborative HIV Cohort (UK CHIC). The epidemic was projected with current or scaled-up HCV treatment, with or without a 20% behavioral risk reduction. RESULTS: HCV prevalence among HIV-positive MSM in UK CHIC increased from 7.3% in 2004 to 9.9% in 2011, whereas primary incidence was flat (1.02-1.38 per 100 person-years). Over the next decade, modeling suggests 94% of infections are attributable to high-risk individuals, comprising 7% of the population. Without treatment, HCV chronic prevalence could have been 38% higher in 2015 (11.9% vs 8.6%). With current treatment and sustained virological response rates (status quo), chronic prevalence is likely to increase to 11% by 2025, but stabilize with DAA introduction in 2015. With DAA scale-up to 80% within 1 year of diagnosis (regardless of disease stage), and 20% per year thereafter, chronic prevalence could decline by 71% (to 3.2%) compared to status quo in 2025. With additional behavioral interventions, chronic prevalence could decline further to <2.5% by 2025. CONCLUSIONS: Epidemiological data and modeling suggest a continuing HCV epidemic among HIV-diagnosed MSM in the United Kingdom driven by high-risk individuals, despite high treatment rates. Substantial reductions in HCV transmission could be achieved through scale-up of DAAs and moderately effective behavioral interventions.

Socioeconomic status and treatment outcomes for individuals with HIV on antiretroviral treatment in the UK: cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have assessed the effect of socioeconomic status on HIV treatment outcomes in settings with universal access to health care. Here we aimed to investigate the association of socioeconomic factors with antiretroviral therapy (ART) non-adherence, virological non-suppression, and virological rebound, in HIV-positive people on ART in the UK. METHODS: We used data from the Antiretrovirals, Sexual Transmission Risk and Attitudes (ASTRA) questionnaire study, which recruited participants aged 18 years or older with HIV from eight HIV outpatient clinics in the UK between Feb 1, 2011, and Dec 31, 2012. Participants self-completed a confidential questionnaire on sociodemographic, health, and lifestyle issues. In participants on ART, we assessed associations of financial hardship, employment, housing, and education with: self-reported ART non-adherence at the time of the questionnaire; virological non-suppression (viral load >50 copies per mL) at the time of questionnaire in those who started ART at least 6 months ago (cross-sectional analysis); and subsequent virological rebound (viral load >200 copies per mL) in those with initial viral load of 50 copies per mL or lower (longitudinal analysis). FINDINGS: Of the 3258 people who completed the questionnaire, 2771 (85%) reported being on ART at the time of the questionnaire, and 2704 with complete data were included. 873 (32%) of 2704 participants reported non-adherence to ART and 219 (9%) of 2405 had virological non-suppression in cross-sectional analysis. Each of the four measures of lower socioeconomic status was strongly associated with non-adherence to ART, and with virological non-suppression (prevalence ratios [PR] adjusted for gender/sexual orientation, age, and ethnic origin: greatest financial hardship vs none 2·4, 95% CI 1·6-3·4; non-employment 2·0, 1·5-2·6; unstable housing vs homeowner 3·0, 1·9-4·6; non-university education 1·6, 1·2-2·2). 139 (8%) of 1740 individuals had subsequent virological rebound (rate=3·6/100 person-years). Low socioeconomic status was predictive of longitudinal rebound risk (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for greatest financial hardship vs none 2·3, 95% CI 1·4-3·9; non-employment 3·0, 2·1-4·2; unstable housing vs homeowner 3·3, 1·8-6·1; non-university education 1·6, 1·1-2·3). INTERPRETATION: Socioeconomic disadvantage was strongly associated with poorer HIV treatment outcomes in this setting with universal health care. Adherence interventions and increased social support for those most at risk should be considered. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.

Controlling the HIV epidemic with antiretrovirals: IAPAC consensus statement on treatment as prevention and preexposure prophylaxis.

In the context of emerging evidence related to preexposure prophylaxis and HIV treatment as prevention, an evidence summit was held in mid-2012 to discuss the current state of the science and to provide a platform for consensus building around whether and how these prevention strategies might be implemented globally. Health care providers, researchers, policy makers, people living with HIV/AIDS, and representatives of government authorities, donor agencies, pharmaceutical companies, advocacy organizations, and professional associations attended from 52 countries. An international advisory committee was convened to identify key messages and recommendations based upon the data presented and discussed at the summit. The advisory committee further worked to develop this consensus statement meant to assist relevant stakeholders in taking stock and mapping out a route forward to enhance the HIV prevention armamentarium.

Developing guidance for HIV prosecutions: an example of harm reduction?

Extensive discussion of the global trend towards the prosecution of individuals for HIV transmission has tended to focus on arguments of principle for or against such prosecutions. There has been less examination of how, where prosecutions are taking place, the community, the voluntary sector and relevant professional bodies (hereinafter the "HIV sector") can mitigate ensuing harm and maximise fairness and understanding in the criminal justice process. In England and Wales, where prosecutions for reckless HIV transmission have been taking place since 2003, the HIV sector persuaded the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to consult on the production of Legal Guidance for CPS prosecutors and caseworkers (hereinafter "Guidance") in this area of law, as well as an accompanying Policy Statement. In this article, Yusef Azad describes both the process and the outcome, and attempts an initial assessment of whether this intervention has benefited people living with HIV.

The criminalization of HIV transmission in England and Wales: questions of law and policy.

In this article, Matthew Weait and Yusef Azad discuss the current law concerning the criminalization of HIV transmission in England and Wales, and raise some issues about the wider implications of criminalization for those working in the HIV/AIDS sector. The authors look at the way the fault requirement of "recklessness" has been interpreted in the cases. They explore the courts' approach to consent--the defence which those who have appealed against conviction have sought to use. Then the authors raise some questions about the relevance of disclosure and the way the courts have dealt with knowledge about HIV status and the risks associated with unprotected sex. Finally, they discuss the relevance of the nature of the relationship between the accused person and the person to whom HIV has allegedly been transmitted, and touch on the potentially stigmatizing effects that criminalization may have on socio-economically marginalized groups. The authors conclude by discussing some more general policy-related issues.