Health systems and the new strategy against sexually transmitted infections

The global HIV response at 40

It is helpful to divide the global HIV response into three phases: The first, from about 1980 to 2000, represents "Calamity". The second, from roughly 2000 to 2015 represents "Hope." The third, from 2015, is unfolding and may be termed "Choices" - and these choices may be severely constrained by COVID, so "Constrained Choices in an era of COVID" may prove more apt. As we take stock of HIV at 40, there are positive lessons for the wider health response - and challenging reflections for the wider impact of the global HIV response. The positive lessons include: (1) the importance of activism; (2) the role of scientific progress and innovation; (3) the impact of evidence in concentrating resources on proven approaches; (4) the importance of surveillance to understanding transmission dynamics; (5) the use of epidemic intelligence to guide precision implementation; (6) the focus on implementation cascades (diagnosis, linkage, adherence, disease suppression); and finally (7) an overarching execution and results focus.Given this remarkable legacy, it seems churlish to ask whether the HIV response could have achieved more. Yet, consider these approximate figures. Development assistance for HIV totals about 100 billion dollars, 70 billion from the USA matched by roughly 100 billion in domestic resources. For 200 billion dollars, should we not have achieved more than 23 million people initiating treatment (very crudely, 10 000 dollars per person on treatment)? Much of the hundred billion dollars of development assistance (roughly half) focused on about a dozen priority countries in eastern and southern African. The larger PEPFAR recipients, with populations of roughly 50 million, each received 5 billion dollars or more cumulatively. And there are further Global Fund contributions of an additional billion dollars in many of these countries. For 6 billion dollars per country, should we have expected more?The World Bank Human Capital Project posits that to maximize human capital formation, countries must ensure that their children survive, are well nourished and stimulated, learn skills and live long, productive lives. Using the Human Capital Index (a composite index based on these factors), South Africa - the largest HIV financing recipient - ranks 126th of 157 countries, below Haiti, Ghana, the Congo Republic, Senegal and Benin. Consider how many recipients of major HIV development finance fall into the bottom fifth: Namibia, Botswana, Eswatini (formerly Swaziland), Malawi, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia, Uganda, Lesotho, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Cote D'Ivoire and Nigeria. Of course, causality is unresolved and there are several possible explanations: (1) low human capital formation may increase HIV transmission; (2) the HIV epidemic may have intergenerational impacts; (3) the all-consuming focus on HIV may have displaced other health, education and development priorities. Yet, it remains hard to see these data and to argue that successful HIV responses among the largest HIV financing recipients strengthened their wider health sector and human development outcomes.A plausible principle emerges. Narrowly targeted disease-specific emergency responses may lead to disease-specific gains but do not improve governance or national systems capacity or wider disease or development outcomes. This is not to undermine the emergency origins of the HIV response; 2021 is not 2000 and it is unlikely that we would have 23 million people initiating treatment without an emergency response. Yet, there are reasons (intensified by COVID), to suggest that we must pivot towards long-term, integrated, developmental, nationally owned and financed, systems-orientated responses - particularly when both development assistance and national budgets are likely to be constrained in an era of COVID.

Cost and cost-effectiveness of point-of-care testing and treatment for sexually transmitted and genital infections in pregnancy in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

The economic and health burden of sexually transmitted and genital infections (henceforth, STIs) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) is substantial. Left untreated, STIs during pregnancy may result in several adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. Timely diagnosis and treatment at point-of-care (POC) can potentially improve these outcomes. Despite the availability and promotion of POC diagnostics for STIs as a key component of antenatal care in LMICs, their widespread use has been limited, owing to the high economic costs faced by individuals and health systems. To date, there have been no systematic reviews which explore the cost or cost-effectiveness of POC testing and treatment of STIs in pregnancy in LMICs. The objective of this protocol is to outline the methods that will compare, synthesise and appraise the existing literature in this domain.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct literature searches in MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science. To find additional literature, we will search Google Scholar and hand search reference lists of included papers. Two reviewers will independently search databases, screen titles, abstracts and full texts; when necessary a third reviewer will resolve disputes. Only cost and cost-effectiveness studies of POC testing and treatment of STIs, including syphilis, chlamydia, trichomonas, gonorrhoea and bacterial vaginosis, in pregnancy in LMICs will be included. Published checklists will be used to assess quality of reporting practices and methodological approaches. We will also assess risk of publication bias. Interstudy heterogeneity will be assessed and depending on variation between studies, a meta-analysis or narrative synthesis will be conducted.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required as the review will use published literature. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed open source journal and presented at an international conference.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018109072.

20S Proteasome as a Drug Target in Trichomonas vaginalis

Trichomoniasis is a sexually transmitted disease with hundreds of millions of annual cases worldwide. Approved treatment options are limited to two related nitro-heterocyclic compounds, yet resistance to these drugs is an increasing concern. New antimicrobials against the causative agent, Trichomonas vaginalis, are urgently needed. We show here that clinically approved anticancer drugs that inhibit the proteasome, a large protease complex with a critical role in degrading intracellular proteins in eukaryotes, have submicromolar activity against the parasite in vitro and on-target activity against the enriched T. vaginalis proteasome in cell-free assays. Proteomic analysis confirmed that the parasite has all seven α and seven β subunits of the eukaryotic proteasome although they have only modest sequence identities, ranging from 28 to 52%, relative to the respective human proteasome subunits. A screen of proteasome inhibitors derived from a marine natural product, carmaphycin, revealed one derivative, carmaphycin-17, with greater activity against T. vaginalis than the reference drug metronidazole, the ability to overcome metronidazole resistance, and reduced human cytotoxicity compared to that of the anticancer proteasome inhibitors. The increased selectivity of carmaphycin-17 for T. vaginalis was related to its >5-fold greater potency against the β1 and β5 catalytic subunits of the T. vaginalis proteasome than against the human proteasome subunits. In a murine model of vaginal trichomonad infection, proteasome inhibitors eliminated or significantly reduced parasite burden upon topical treatment without any apparent adverse effects. Together, these findings validate the proteasome of T. vaginalis as a therapeutic target for development of a novel class of trichomonacidal agents.