Optimal breastfeeding durations for HIV-exposed infants: the impact of maternal ART use, infant mortality and replacement feeding risk

INTRODUCTION

In 2010, the WHO recommended women living with HIV breastfeed for 12 months while taking antiretroviral therapy (ART) to balance breastfeeding benefits against HIV transmission risks. To inform the 2016 WHO guidelines, we updated prior research on the impact of breastfeeding duration on HIV-free infant survival (HFS) by incorporating maternal ART duration, infant/child mortality and mother-to-child transmission data.

METHODS

Using the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications (CEPAC)-Infant model, we simulated the impact of breastfeeding duration on 24-month HFS among HIV-exposed, uninfected infants. We defined "optimal" breastfeeding durations as those maximizing 24-month HFS. We varied maternal ART duration, mortality rates among breastfed infants/children, and relative risk of mortality associated with replacement feeding ("RRRF"), modelled as a multiplier on all-cause mortality for replacement-fed infants/children (range: 1 [no additional risk] to 6). The base-case simulated RRRF = 3, median infant mortality, and 24-month maternal ART duration.

RESULTS

In the base-case, HFS ranged from 83.1% (no breastfeeding) to 90.2% (12-months breastfeeding). Optimal breastfeeding durations increased with higher RRRF values and longer maternal ART durations, but did not change substantially with variation in infant mortality rates. Optimal breastfeeding durations often exceeded the previous WHO recommendation of 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

In settings with high RRRF and long maternal ART durations, HFS is maximized when mothers breastfeed longer than the previously-recommended 12 months. In settings with low RRRF or short maternal ART durations, shorter breastfeeding durations optimize HFS. If mothers are supported to use ART for longer periods of time, it is possible to reduce transmission risks and gain the benefits of longer breastfeeding durations.

1286. Evaluating Strategies to Reduce Risk of HIV Infection in the US Blood Supply

Background

Due to risk of HIV transmission, the FDA recommends a ban on blood donation from men who have sex with men (MSM). Revised in 2015, the current restriction applies to men who have had sex with a man in the year before donation. Given advances in HIV testing and the option of risk-based screening, the current approach may not represent the optimal strategy for ensuring a safe blood supply.

Methods

Using a decision tree, we compared three strategies: (1) the current standard: a deferral for MSM followed by fourth-generation HIV antibody/antigen (Ab/Ag) and viral load (VL) testing of all donated units; (2) test-only: no deferral, with Ab/Ag and VL testing; (3) risk-based: deferral for all male donors who report condomless anal intercourse in the past 6 weeks, followed by Ab/Ag and VL testing. The primary outcome was the expected number of accepted HIV+ donations per million units of donated blood. Key input parameters include MSM prevalence (3.6%), HIV testing sensitivity for chronic (99.96%) and acute (75%) infection, and false negative rate of the current MSM deferral question and the risk-based screening question (2.6% for each). In sensitivity analyses, we assessed the impact of variation in these parameters.

Results

In the base case, the current strategy resulted in 5.39 HIV+ accepted blood donations per million; the testing only strategy resulted in 7.10 HIV+ accepted blood donations per million; and the risk-based strategy resulted in 2.54 HIV+ accepted blood donations per million. In sensitivity analyses, the risk-based strategy was superior across plausible ranges of HIV test sensitivity and MSM prevalence. The risk-based strategy was superior when the false negative rate generated by the risk-based screening question was <10.4%; at higher rates, the current strategy was superior. The current strategy was superior when the MSM deferral question yielded <0.8% false negative rate; at higher rates, the risk-based strategy is superior. Compared with the current standard, a risk-based strategy could add 5 million low-risk MSM to the potential donor supply.

Conclusion

A risk-based screening question, combined with Ab/Ag and VL testing, may be more effective than the current strategy. The quality and ability of screening questions to accurately assess risk is key to any pre-donation screening strategy.

Disclosures

All authors: No reported disclosures.

International AIDS Society global scientific strategy: towards an HIV cure 2016

Antiretroviral therapy is not curative. Given the challenges in providing lifelong therapy to a global population of more than 35 million people living with HIV, there is intense interest in developing a cure for HIV infection. The International AIDS Society convened a group of international experts to develop a scientific strategy for research towards an HIV cure. This Perspective summarizes the group's strategy.

The impact of the 2013 WHO antiretroviral therapy guidelines on the feasibility of HIV population prevention trials

BACKGROUND

Several cluster-randomized HIV prevention trials aim to demonstrate the population-level preventive impact of antiretroviral therapy (ART). 2013 World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines raising the ART initiation threshold to CD4 <500/µL could attenuate these trials' effect size by increasing ART usage in control clusters.

METHODS

We used a computational model to simulate strategies from a hypothetical cluster-randomized HIV prevention trial. The primary model outcome was the relative reduction in 24-month HIV incidence between control (ART offered with CD4 below threshold) and intervention (ART offered to all) strategies. We assessed this incidence reduction using the revised (CD4 <500/µL) and prior (CD4 <350/µL) control ART initiation thresholds. Additionally, we evaluated changes to trial characteristics that could bolster the incidence reduction.

RESULTS

With a control ART initiation threshold of CD4 <350/µL, 24-month HIV incidence under control and intervention strategies was 2.46/100 person-years (PY) and 1.96/100 PY, a 21% reduction. Raising the threshold to CD4 <500/µL decreased the incidence reduction by more than one-third, to 12%. Using this higher threshold, moving to a 36-month horizon (vs 24-month), yearly control-strategy HIV screening (vs bian-nual), and intervention-strategy screening every 2 months (vs biannual), resulted in a 31% incidence reduction that was similar to effect size projections for ongoing trials. Alternate assumptions regarding cross-cluster contamination had the greatest influence on the incidence reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing the 2013 WHO HIV treatment threshold could substantially diminish the incidence reduction in HIV population prevention trials. Alternative HIV testing frequencies and trial horizons can bolster this incidence reduction, but they could be logistically and ethically challenging. The feasibility of HIV population prevention trials should be reassessed as the implementation of treatment guidelines evolves.

Implementing rapid HIV testing with or without risk-reduction counseling in drug treatment centers: results of a randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

We examined the effectiveness of risk reduction counseling and the role of on-site HIV testing in drug treatment.

METHODS

Between January and May 2009, we randomized 1281 HIV-negative (or status unknown) adults who reported no past-year HIV testing to (1) referral for off-site HIV testing, (2) HIV risk-reduction counseling with on-site rapid HIV testing, or (3) verbal information about testing only with on-site rapid HIV testing.

RESULTS

We defined 2 primary self-reported outcomes a priori: receipt of HIV test results and unprotected anal or vaginal intercourse episodes at 6-month follow-up. The combined on-site rapid testing participants received more HIV test results than off-site testing referral participants (P<.001; Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio=4.52; 97.5% confidence interval [CI]=3.57, 5.72). At 6 months, there were no significant differences in unprotected intercourse episodes between the combined on-site testing arms and the referral arm (P=.39; incidence rate ratio [IRR]=1.04; 97.5% CI=0.95, 1.14) or the 2 on-site testing arms (P=.81; IRR=1.03; 97.5% CI=0.84, 1.26).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated on-site rapid HIV testing's value in drug treatment centers and found no additional benefit from HIV sexual risk-reduction counseling.

Nomenclature and definitions for emergency department human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing: report from the 2007 conference of the National Emergency Department HIV Testing Consortium

Early diagnosis of persons infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) through diagnostic testing and screening is a critical priority for individual and public health. Emergency departments (EDs) have an important role in this effort. As EDs gain experience in HIV testing, it is increasingly apparent that implementing testing is conceptually and operationally complex. A wide variety of HIV testing practice and research models have emerged, each reflecting adaptations to site-specific factors and the needs of local populations. The diversity and complexity inherent in nascent ED HIV testing practice and research are associated with the risk that findings will not be described according to a common lexicon. This article presents a comprehensive set of terms and definitions that can be used to describe ED-based HIV testing programs, developed by consensus opinion from the inaugural meeting of the National ED HIV Testing Consortium. These definitions are designed to facilitate discussion, increase comparability of future reports, and potentially accelerate wider implementation of ED HIV testing.

Gender differences in research grant applications and funding outcomes for medical school faculty

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether there were differences in acquisition of research grant support between male and female faculty at eight Harvard Medical School-affiliated institutions.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the participating institutions on all research grant applications submitted by full-time faculty from 2001 through 2003. Data were analyzed by gender and faculty rank of applicant, source of support (federal or nonfederal), funding outcome, amount of funding requested, and amount of funding awarded.

RESULTS

Data on 6319 grant applications submitted by 2480 faculty applicants were analyzed. Women represented 29% of investigators and submitted 26% of all grant requests. There were significant gender differences in the mean number of submissions per applicant (women 2.3, men 2.7), success rate (women 41%, men 45%), number of years requested (women 3.1, men 3.4), median annual amount requested (women $115,325, men $150,000), mean number of years awarded (women 2.9, men 3.2), and median annual amount awarded (women $98,094, men $125,000). After controlling for academic rank, grant success rates were not significantly different between women and men, although submission rates by women were significantly lower at the lowest faculty rank. Although there was no difference in the proportion of money awarded to money requested, women were awarded significantly less money than men at the ranks of instructor and associate professor. More men than women applied to the National Institutes of Health, which awarded higher dollar amounts than other funding sources.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender disparity in grant funding is largely explained by gender disparities in academic rank. Controlling for rank, women and men were equally successful in acquiring grants. However, gender differences in grant application behavior at lower academic ranks also contribute to gender disparity in grant funding for medical science.