Comprehensive profiling of pre-infection antibodies identifies HIV targets associated with viremic control and viral load.

Background: High HIV viral load (VL) is associated with increased transmission risk and faster disease progression. HIV controllers achieve viral suppression without antiretroviral (ARV) treatment. We evaluated viremic control in a community-randomized trial with >48,000 participants. Methods: A massively multiplexed antibody profiling system, VirScan, was used to quantify pre- and post-infection antibody reactivity to HIV peptides in 664 samples from 429 participants (13 controllers, 135 viremic non-controllers, 64 other non-controllers, 217 uninfected persons). Controllers had VLs <2,000 copies/mL with no ARV drugs detected at the first HIV-positive visit and one year later. Viremic non-controllers had VLs 2,000 copies/mL with no ARV drugs detected at the first HIV-positive visit. Other non-controllers had either ARV drugs detected at the first HIV-positive visit (n=47) or VLs <2,000 copies/mL with no ARV drugs detected at only one HIV-positive visit (n=17). Results: We identified pre-infection HIV antibody reactivities that correlated with post-infection VL. Pre-infection reactivity to an epitope in the HR2 domain of gp41 was associated with controller status and lower VL. Pre-infection reactivity to an epitope in the C2 domain of gp120 was associated with non-controller status and higher VL. Different patterns of antibody reactivity were observed over time for these two epitopes. Conclusion: These studies suggest that pre-infection HIV antibodies are associated with controller status and modulation of HIV VL. These findings may inform research on antibody-based interventions for HIV treatment.

Evaluation of multi-assay algorithms for cross-sectional HIV incidence estimation in settings with universal antiretroviral treatment.

BACKGROUND: Multi-assay algorithms (MAAs) are used to estimate population-level HIV incidence and identify individuals with recent infection. Many MAAs use low viral load (VL) as a biomarker for long-term infection. This could impact incidence estimates in settings with high rates of early HIV treatment initiation. We evaluated the performance of two MAAs that do not include VL. METHODS: Samples were collected from 219 seroconverters (infected < 1 year) and 4376 non-seroconverters (infected > 1 year) in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial; 28.8% of seroconverter samples and 73.2% of non-seroconverter samples had VLs ≤ 400 copies/mL. Samples were tested with the Limiting Antigen Avidity assay (LAg) and JHU BioRad-Avidity assays. Antibody reactivity to two HIV peptides was measured using the MSD U-PLEX assay. Two MAAs were evaluated that do not include VL: a MAA that includes the LAg-Avidity assay and BioRad-Avidity assay (LAg + BR) and a MAA that includes the LAg-Avidity assay and two peptide biomarkers (LAg + PepPair). Performance of these MAAs was compared to a widely used MAA that includes LAg and VL (LAg + VL). RESULTS: The incidence estimate for LAg + VL (1.29%, 95% CI: 0.97-1.62) was close to the observed longitudinal incidence (1.34% 95% CI: 1.17-1.53). The incidence estimates for the other two MAAs were higher (LAg + BR: 2.56%, 95% CI 2.01-3.11; LAg + PepPair: 2.84%, 95% CI: 1.36-4.32). LAg + BR and LAg + PepPair also misclassified more individuals infected > 2 years as recently infected than LAg + VL (1.2% [42/3483 and 1.5% [51/3483], respectively, vs. 0.2% [6/3483]). LAg + BR classified more seroconverters as recently infected than LAg + VL or LAg + PepPair (80 vs. 58 and 50, respectively) and identified ~ 25% of virally suppressed seroconverters as recently infected. CONCLUSIONS: The LAg + VL MAA produced a cross-sectional incidence estimate that was closer to the longitudinal estimate than two MAAs that did not include VL. The LAg + BR MAA classified the greatest number of individual seroconverters as recently infected but had a higher false recent rate.

Evaluation of multi-assay algorithms for identifying individuals with recent HIV infection: HPTN 071 (PopART).

BACKGROUND: Assays and multi-assay algorithms (MAAs) have been developed for population-level cross-sectional HIV incidence estimation. These algorithms use a combination of serologic and/or non-serologic biomarkers to assess the duration of infection. We evaluated the performance of four MAAs for individual-level recency assessments. METHODS: Samples were obtained from 220 seroconverters (infected <1 year) and 4,396 non-seroconverters (infected >1 year) enrolled in an HIV prevention trial (HPTN 071 [PopART]); 28.6% of the seroconverters and 73.4% of the non-seroconverters had HIV viral loads ≤400 copies/mL. Samples were tested with two laboratory-based assays (LAg-Avidity, JHU BioRad-Avidity) and a point-of-care assay (rapid LAg). The four MAAs included different combinations of these assays and HIV viral load. Seroconverters on antiretroviral treatment (ART) were identified using a qualitative multi-drug assay. RESULTS: The MAAs identified between 54 and 100 (25% to 46%) of the seroconverters as recently-infected. The false recent rate of the MAAs for infections >2 years duration ranged from 0.2%-1.3%. The MAAs classified different overlapping groups of individuals as recent vs. non-recent. Only 32 (15%) of the 220 seroconverters were classified as recent by all four MAAs. Viral suppression impacted the performance of the two LAg-based assays. LAg-Avidity assay values were also lower for seroconverters who were virally suppressed on ART compared to those with natural viral suppression. CONCLUSIONS: The four MAAs evaluated varied in sensitivity and specificity for identifying persons infected <1 year as recently infected and classified different groups of seroconverters as recently infected. Sensitivity was low for all four MAAs. These performance issues should be considered if these methods are used for individual-level recency assessments.

Determination of HIV status and identification of incident HIV infections in a large, community-randomized trial: HPTN 071 (PopART).

INTRODUCTION: The HPTN 071 (PopART) trial evaluated the impact of an HIV combination prevention package that included "universal testing and treatment" on HIV incidence in 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa during 2013-2018. The primary study endpoint was based on the results of laboratory-based HIV testing for> 48,000 participants who were followed for up to three years. This report evaluated the performance of HIV assays and algorithms used to determine HIV status and identify incident HIV infections in HPTN 071, and assessed the impact of errors on HIV incidence estimates. METHODS: HIV status was determined using a streamlined, algorithmic approach. A single HIV screening test was performed at centralized laboratories in Zambia and South Africa (all participants, all visits). Additional testing was performed at the HPTN Laboratory Center using antigen/antibody screening tests, a discriminatory test and an HIV RNA test. This testing was performed to investigate cases with discordant test results and confirm incident HIV infections. RESULTS: HIV testing identified 978 seroconverter cases. This included 28 cases where the participant had acute HIV infection at the first HIV-positive visit. Investigations of cases with discordant test results identified cases where there was a participant or sample error (mixups). Seroreverter cases (errors where status changed from HIV infected to HIV uninfected, 0.4% of all cases) were excluded from the primary endpoint analysis. Statistical analysis demonstrated that exclusion of those cases improved the accuracy of HIV incidence estimates. CONCLUSIONS: This report demonstrates that the streamlined, algorithmic approach effectively identified HIV infections in this large cluster-randomized trial. Longitudinal HIV testing (all participants, all visits) and quality control testing provided useful data on the frequency of errors and provided more accurate data for HIV incidence estimates.