Lessons Learned from Programmatic Gains in HIV Service Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic - 41 PEPFAR-Supported Countries, 2020.

The U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) supports country programs in identifying persons living with HIV infection (PLHIV), providing life-saving treatment, and reducing the spread of HIV in countries around the world (1,2). CDC used Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting (MER) data* to assess the extent to which COVID-19 mitigation strategies affected HIV service delivery across the HIV care continuum† globally during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Indicators included the number of reported HIV-positive test results, the number of PLHIV who were receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART), and the rates of HIV viral load suppression. Percent change in performance was assessed between countries during the first 3 months of 2020, before COVID-19 mitigation efforts began (January-March 2020), and the last 3 months of the calendar year (October-December 2020). Data were reviewed for all 41 countries to assess total and country-level percent change for each indicator. Then, qualitative data were reviewed among countries in the upper quartile to assess specific strategies that contributed to programmatic gains. Overall, positive percent change was observed in PEPFAR-supported countries in HIV treatment (5%) and viral load suppression (2%) during 2020. Countries reporting the highest gains across the HIV care continuum during 2020 attributed successes to reducing or streamlining facility attendance through strategies such as enhancing index testing (offering of testing to the biologic children and partners of PLHIV)§ and community- and home-based testing; treatment delivery approaches; and improvements in data use through monitoring activities, systems, and data quality checks. Countries that reported program improvements during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic offer important information about how lifesaving HIV treatment might be provided during a global public health crisis.

Estimated SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in the US as of September 2020.

Importance: Case-based surveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection likely underestimates the true prevalence of infections. Large-scale seroprevalence surveys can better estimate infection across many geographic regions. Objective: To estimate the prevalence of persons with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using residual sera from commercial laboratories across the US and assess changes over time. Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated, cross-sectional study conducted across all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico used a convenience sample of residual serum specimens provided by persons of all ages that were originally submitted for routine screening or clinical management from 2 private clinical commercial laboratories. Samples were obtained during 4 collection periods: July 27 to August 13, August 10 to August 27, August 24 to September 10, and September 7 to September 24, 2020. Exposures: Infection with SARS-CoV-2. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 as measured by the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 by 1 of 3 chemiluminescent immunoassays. Iterative poststratification was used to adjust seroprevalence estimates to the demographic profile and urbanicity of each jurisdiction. Seroprevalence was estimated by jurisdiction, sex, age group (0-17, 18-49, 50-64, and ≥65 years), and metropolitan/nonmetropolitan status. Results: Of 177 919 serum samples tested, 103 771 (58.3%) were from women, 26 716 (15.0%) from persons 17 years or younger, 47 513 (26.7%) from persons 65 years or older, and 26 290 (14.8%) from individuals living in nonmetropolitan areas. Jurisdiction-level seroprevalence over 4 collection periods ranged from less than 1% to 23%. In 42 of 49 jurisdictions with sufficient samples to estimate seroprevalence across all periods, fewer than 10% of people had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Seroprevalence estimates varied between sexes, across age groups, and between metropolitan/nonmetropolitan areas. Changes from period 1 to 4 were less than 7 percentage points in all jurisdictions and varied across sites. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that as of September 2020, most persons in the US did not have serologic evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, although prevalence varied widely by jurisdiction. Biweekly nationwide testing of commercial clinical laboratory sera can play an important role in helping track the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the US.

HIV Prevalence, Risk Factors for Infection, and Uptake of Prevention, Testing, and Treatment among Female Sex Workers in Namibia.

BACKGROUND: In most settings, Female Sex Workers (FSW) bear a disproportionate burden of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) disease worldwide. Representative data to inform the development of behavioral and biomedical interventions for FSW in Namibia have not been published. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to measure HIV prevalence, identify risk factors for infection, and describe uptake of prevention, testing, and treatment among FSW in Namibia. METHODS: We conducted cross-sectional surveys using Respondent-driven Sampling (RDS) in the Namibian cities of Katima Mulilo, Oshikango, Swakopmund/Walvis Bay, and Windhoek. Participating FSW completed behavioral questionnaires and rapid HIV testing. RESULTS: City-specific ranges of key indicators were: HIV prevalence (31.0-52.3%), reached by prevention programs in the past 12 months (46.9-73.6%), condom use at last sex with commercial (82.1-91.1%) and non-commercial (87.0-94.2%) partners, and tested for HIV within past 12 months or already aware of HIV-positive serostatus (56.9-82.1%). Factors associated with HIV infection varied by site and included: older age, having multiple commercial or non-commercial sex partners, unemployment, being currently out of school, and lower education level. Among HIV-positive FSW, 57.1% were aware of their HIV-positive serostatus and 33.7% were on antiretroviral treatment. DISCUSSION: Our results indicate extremely high HIV prevalence and low levels of case identification and treatment among FSW in Namibia. Our results, which are the first representative community-based estimates among FSW in Namibia, can inform the scale-up of interventions to reduce the risk for HIV acquisition and onward transmission, including treatment as prevention and pre-exposure prophylaxis.

COVID-19 Among American Indian and Alaska Native Persons - 23 States, January 31-July 3, 2020.

Although non-Hispanic American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) persons account for 0.7% of the U.S. population,* a recent analysis reported that 1.3% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases reported to CDC with known race and ethnicity were among AI/AN persons (1). To assess the impact of COVID-19 among the AI/AN population, reports of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases during January 22†-July 3, 2020 were analyzed. The analysis was limited to 23 states§ with >70% complete race/ethnicity information and five or more laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases among both AI/AN persons (alone or in combination with other races and ethnicities) and non-Hispanic white (white) persons. Among 424,899 COVID-19 cases reported by these states, 340,059 (80%) had complete race/ethnicity information; among these 340,059 cases, 9,072 (2.7%) occurred among AI/AN persons, and 138,960 (40.9%) among white persons. Among 340,059 cases with complete patient race/ethnicity data, the cumulative incidence among AI/AN persons in these 23 states was 594 per 100,000 AI/AN population (95% confidence interval [CI] = 203-1,740), compared with 169 per 100,000 white population (95% CI = 137-209) (rate ratio [RR] = 3.5; 95% CI = 1.2-10.1). AI/AN persons with COVID-19 were younger (median age = 40 years; interquartile range [IQR] = 26-56 years) than were white persons (median age = 51 years; IQR = 32-67 years). More complete case report data and timely, culturally responsive, and evidence-based public health efforts that leverage the strengths of AI/AN communities are needed to decrease COVID-19 transmission and improve patient outcomes.

Rates and Correlates of HIV Incidence in Namibia's Zambezi Region From 2014 to 2016: Sentinel, Community-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Direct measures of HIV incidence are needed to assess the population-level impact of prevention programs but are scarcely available in the subnational epidemic hotspots of sub-Saharan Africa. We created a sentinel HIV incidence cohort within a community-based program that provided home-based HIV testing to all residents of Namibia's Zambezi region, where approximately 24% of the adult population was estimated to be living with HIV. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate HIV incidence, detect correlates of HIV acquisition, and assess the feasibility of the sentinel, community-based approach to HIV incidence surveillance in a subnational epidemic hotspot. METHODS: Following the program's initial home-based testing (December 2014-July 2015), we purposefully selected 10 clusters of 60 to 70 households each and invited residents who were HIV negative and aged ≥15 years to participate in the cohort. Consenting participants completed behavioral interviews and a second HIV test approximately 1 year later (March-September 2016). We used Poisson models to calculate HIV incidence rates between baseline and follow-up and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models to assess the correlates of seroconversion. RESULTS: Among 1742 HIV-negative participants, 1624 (93.23%) completed follow-up. We observed 26 seroconversions in 1954 person-years (PY) of follow-up, equating to an overall incidence rate of 1.33 per 100 PY (95% CI 0.91-1.95). Among women, the incidence was 1.55 per 100 PY (95% CI 1.12-2.17) and significantly higher among those aged 15 to 24 years and residing in rural areas (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 4.26, 95% CI 1.39-13.13; P=.01), residing in the Ngweze suburb of Katima Mulilo city (aHR 2.34, 95% CI 1.25-4.40; P=.01), who had no prior HIV testing in the year before cohort enrollment (aHR 3.38, 95% CI 1.04-10.95; P=.05), and who had engaged in transactional sex (aHR 17.64, 95% CI 2.88-108.14; P=.02). Among men, HIV incidence was 1.05 per 100 PY (95% CI 0.54-2.31) and significantly higher among those aged 40 to 44 years (aHR 13.04, 95% CI 5.98-28.41; P<.001) and had sought HIV testing outside the study between baseline and follow-up (aHR 8.28, 95% CI 1.39-49.38; P=.02). No seroconversions occurred among persons with HIV-positive partners on antiretroviral treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly three decades into Namibia's generalized HIV epidemic, these are the first estimates of HIV incidence for its highest prevalence region. By creating a sentinel incidence cohort from the infrastructure of an existing community-based testing program, we were able to characterize current transmission patterns, corroborate known risk factors for HIV acquisition, and provide insight into the efficacy of prevention interventions in a subnational epidemic hotspot. This study demonstrates an efficient and scalable framework for longitudinal HIV incidence surveillance that can be implemented in diverse sentinel sites and populations.

A pragmatic approach to monitor and evaluate implementation and impact of differentiated ART delivery for global and national stakeholders.

INTRODUCTION: The World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendation of "Treat All" has accelerated the call for differentiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) delivery, a method of care that efficiently uses limited resources to increase access to HIV treatment. WHO has further recommended that stable individuals on ART receive refills every 3 to 6 months and attend clinical visits every 3 to 6 months. However, there is not yet consensus on how to ensure that the quality of services is maintained as countries strive to meet these standards. This commentary responds to this gap by defining a pragmatic approach to the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of the scale up of differentiated ART delivery for global and national stakeholders. DISCUSSION: Programme managers need to demonstrate that the scale up of differentiated ART delivery is achieving the desired effectiveness and efficiency outcomes to justify continued support by national and global stakeholders. To achieve this goal, the two existing global WHO HIV treatment indicators of ART retention and viral suppression should be augmented with two broad aggregate measures. The addition of indicators measuring the frequency of (1) clinical and (2) refill visits by PLHIV per year will allow evaluation of the pace of scale up while monitoring its overall effect on the quality and efficiency of services. The combination of these four routinely collected aggregate indicators will also facilitate the comparison of outcomes among facilities, regions or countries implementing different models of ART delivery. Enhanced monitoring or additional assessments will be required to answer other critical questions on the process of implementation, acceptability, effectiveness and efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: These proposed outcomes are useful markers for the effectiveness and efficiency of the health system's attempts to deliver quality treatment to those who need it-and still reserve as much of the available resource pool as possible for other key elements of the HIV response.

Measles immunity among pregnant women aged 15-44 years in Namibia, 2008 and 2010.

BACKGROUND: Namibia experienced a large measles outbreak starting in 2009, with 38% of reported cases in adults, including women of reproductive age. Population immunity was assessed among pregnant women to determine whether immunization activities were needed in adults to achieve measles elimination in Namibia. METHODS: A total of 1708 and 2040 specimens sampled from Namibian pregnant women aged 15-44 years who were included in the 2008 and 2010 National HIV Sentinel Survey, respectively, were tested for measles immunoglobulin G antibody. The proportion of women seropositive overall and by 5-year age strata was determined, and factors associated with seropositivity were analyzed by logistic regression, including age, facility type, gravidity, HIV status, and urban/rural setting. Seropositivity in 2008 versus 2010 was compared. RESULTS: In both analysis years, measles seropositivity was lower in 15-19-year-olds (77%) and 20-24-year-olds (85-87%) and higher in 25-44-year-olds (90-94%) (2008, p<0.001; 2010, p<0.001). Overall measles seropositivity did not differ between 2008 (87%) and 2010 (87%) (p=0.7). HIV status did not affect seropositivity. CONCLUSIONS: Late in a large measles outbreak, 13% of pregnant women in Namibia, and almost one in four 15-19-year-old pregnant women, remained susceptible to measles. In Namibia, immunization campaigns with measles-containing vaccine should be considered for adults.

Rubella immunity among pregnant women aged 15-44 years, Namibia, 2010.

BACKGROUND: The level of rubella susceptibility among women of reproductive age in Namibia is unknown. Documenting the risk of rubella will help estimate the potential burden of disease in Namibian women and the risk of congenital rubella syndrome (CRS) in infants, and will guide strategies for the introduction of rubella vaccine. METHODS: A total of 2044 serum samples from pregnant Namibian women aged 15-44 years were tested for rubella immunoglobulin G antibody; the samples were obtained during the 2010 National HIV Sentinel Survey. The proportion of women seropositive for rubella was determined by 5-year age strata, and factors associated with seropositivity were analyzed by logistic regression, including age, gravidity, HIV status, facility type, and urban/rural status. RESULTS: Overall rubella seroprevalence was 85% (95% confidence interval (CI) 83-86%). Seroprevalence varied by age group (83-90%) and health district (71-100%). In the multivariable model, women from urban residences had higher odds of seropositivity as compared to women from rural residences (odds ratio 1.40, 95% CI 1.09-1.81). CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of a routine rubella immunization program, the high level of rubella seropositivity suggests rubella virus transmission in Namibia, yet 15% of pregnant Namibian women remain susceptible to rubella. The introduction of rubella vaccine will help reduce the risk of rubella in pregnant women and CRS in infants.

Poliovirus immunity among pregnant females aged 15-44 years, Namibia, 2010.

BACKGROUND: Poliovirus (PV) antibody seroprevalence studies assess population immunity, verify an immunization program's performance and vaccine efficacy, and guide polio eradication strategy. Namibia experienced a polio outbreak among adults in 2006, yet population seroimmunity was unknown. METHODS: We tested 2061 specimens from Namibian pregnant females aged 15-44 years for neutralizing antibody to PV types 1-3 (PV1-3); all females were sampled during the 2010 National HIV Sentinel Survey. We determined the proportion of females seropositive for PV antibody by 5-year age strata, and analyzed factors associated with seropositivity, including age, gravidity, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection status, residence, and antiretroviral treatment, by log-binomial regression. RESULTS: The seroprevalence was 94.6% for PV1, 97.0% for PV2, and 85.1% for PV3. HIV-positive females had significantly lower seroprevalence than HIV-negative females for PV1 (91.8% vs 95.3%; P<.01) and PV3 (80.0% vs 86.1%; P<.01) but not for PV2 (96.4% vs 97.1%; P=.3). The prevalence ratio of seropositivity for HIV-positive females versus HIV-negative females was 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI], .92-.98) for PV1, 0.99 (95% CI, .97-1.01) for PV2, and 0.92 (95% CI, .87-.96) for PV3. CONCLUSIONS: Despite relatively high PV seroprevalence, Namibia might remain at risk for a PV outbreak, particularly in lower-seroprevalence populations, such as HIV-positive females. Namibia should continue to maintain high routine polio vaccination coverage.

Public health triangulation: approach and application to synthesizing data to understand national and local HIV epidemics.

BACKGROUND: Public health triangulation is a process for reviewing, synthesising and interpreting secondary data from multiple sources that bear on the same question to make public health decisions. It can be used to understand the dynamics of HIV transmission and to measure the impact of public health programs. While traditional intervention research and meta-analysis would be ideal sources of information for public health decision making, they are infrequently available, and often decisions can be based only on surveillance and survey data. METHODS: The process involves examination of a wide variety of data sources and both biological, behavioral and program data and seeks input from stakeholders to formulate meaningful public health questions. Finally and most importantly, it uses the results to inform public health decision-making. There are 12 discrete steps in the triangulation process, which included identification and assessment of key questions, identification of data sources, refining questions, gathering data and reports, assessing the quality of those data and reports, formulating hypotheses to explain trends in the data, corroborating or refining working hypotheses, drawing conclusions, communicating results and recommendations and taking public health action. RESULTS: Triangulation can be limited by the quality of the original data, the potentials for ecological fallacy and "data dredging" and reproducibility of results. CONCLUSIONS: Nonetheless, we believe that public health triangulation allows for the interpretation of data sets that cannot be analyzed using meta-analysis and can be a helpful adjunct to surveillance, to formal public health intervention research and to monitoring and evaluation, which in turn lead to improved national strategic planning and resource allocation.