Social network methods for HIV case-finding among people who inject drugs in Tajikistan.

INTRODUCTION: HIV testing programmes have struggled to reach the most marginalized populations at risk for HIV. Social network methods such as respondent-driven sampling (RDS) and peer-based active case-finding (ACF) may be effective in overcoming barriers to reaching these populations. We compared the client characteristics, proportion testing HIV positive (yield), and number of new cases found through two RDS strategies and an ACF approach to HIV case-finding among people who inject drugs (PWID) in Tajikistan. METHODS: Routine programme data from adult PWID recruited to testing under the HIV Flagship Project in Tajikistan were analysed to compare client demographic and clinical characteristics across the three approaches. We also compared the number of previously untested clients, the number of new HIV cases found, and the yield across the case-finding strategies, and evaluated predictors of new HIV diagnosis using fixed-effects logistic regression. RESULTS: From 24 October 2016 to 30 June 2017, Flagship tested 10,300 PWID for HIV, including 2143 under RDS with unrestricted waves (RDS1, yield: 1.5%), 3517 under restricted RDS (RDS2, yield: 2.6%), and 4640 under ACF (yield: 1.5%). Clients recruited under ACF were similar in age (35.8 vs. 36.8) and gender (91% vs. 90% male) to those recruited through RDS, though ACF clients were more likely to report being a first-time tester (85.1% vs. 68.3%, p < 0.001). After controlling for age, sex, previous testing history and accounting for clustering at the site level, we found that clients tested under both RDS1 (aOR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.04 to 2.90) and RDS2 (aOR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.11 to 2.15) had higher odds of testing newly positive for HIV relative to clients recruited through ACF. We did not find significant differences in the odds of new HIV infection between those recruited from RDS1 versus RDS2 (aOR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.86). CONCLUSIONS: RDS-based interventions resulted in higher yields and overall case-finding, especially when recruitment was restricted. However, ACF identified a higher proportion of first-time testers. To find at least 90% of PWID living with HIV in Tajikistan, it may be necessary to implement multiple case-finding approaches concurrently to maximize testing coverage.

Estrogen- and progesterone-receptor status in ECOG 2197: comparison of immunohistochemistry by local and central laboratories and quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction by central laboratory.

PURPOSE: Central and local laboratory concordance for hormone receptor measurement is therapeutically important. This study compares estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) measured by local laboratory immunohistochemistry (IHC), central IHC, and central reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) using a proprietary 21-gene assay. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A case-control sample of 776 breast cancer patients from Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) study E2197 was evaluated. Central IHC Allred score for ER and PR was obtained using tissue microarrays and 1D5 ER antibody and 636 PR antibody. Quantitative RT-PCR for ER and PR in whole sections was performed using the 21-gene assay. RESULTS: For ER, the concordance between local and central IHC was 90% (95% CI, 88% to 92%), between local IHC and central RT-PCR was 91% (95% CI, 89% to 93%), and between central IHC and central RT-PCR was 93% (95% CI, 91% to 95%). For PR, the concordance between local IHC and central IHC was 84% (95% CI, 82% to 87%), between local IHC and central RT-PCR was 88% (95% CI, 85% to 90%), and between central IHC and central RT-PCR was 90% (95% CI, 88% to 92%). Although concordance was high, IHC ER-negative cases that were RT-PCR positive were more common than IHC ER-positive cases that were RT-PCR negative. In ER-positive patients, ER expression by central IHC Allred score was marginally associated with recurrence (P = .091), and ER expression by central RT-PCR was significantly associated with recurrence (P = .014). However, recurrence score, which incorporates additional genes/pathways, was a highly significant predictor of recurrence (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: There is a high degree of concordance among local IHC, central IHC, and central RT-PCR by the proprietary gene assay for ER and PR status. Although ER expression is marginally associated with relapse in ER-positive patients treated with chemohormonal therapy, recurrence score is a highly significant predictor of recurrence.