Antiseptic mouthwash for gonorrhoea prevention (OMEGA): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: To address the increasing incidence of gonorrhoea and antimicrobial resistance, we compared the efficacy of Listerine and Biotène mouthwashes for preventing gonorrhoea among men who have sex with men (MSM). METHODS: The OMEGA trial was a multicentre, parallel-group, double-blind randomised controlled trial among MSM, done at three urban sexual health clinics and one general practice clinic in Australia. Men were eligible if they were diagnosed with oropharyngeal gonorrhoea by nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) in the previous 30 days or were aged 16-24 years. They were randomly assigned to receive Listerine (intervention) or Biotène (control) via a computer-generated sequence (1:1 ratio, block size of four). Participants, clinicians, data collectors, data analysts, and outcome adjudicators were masked to the interventions after assignment. Participants were instructed to rinse and gargle with 20 mL of mouthwash for 60 s at least once daily for 12 weeks. Oropharyngeal swabs were collected by research nurses every 6 weeks, and participants provided saliva samples every 3 weeks, to be tested for Neisseria gonorrhoeae with NAAT and quantitative PCR. The primary outcome was proportion of MSM diagnosed with oropharyngeal N gonorrhoeae infection at any point over the 12-week period, defined as a positive result for either oropharyngeal swabs or saliva samples by NAAT, and the cumulative incidence of oropharyngeal gonorrhoea at the week 12 visit. A modified intention-to-treat analysis for the primary outcome was done that included men who provided at least one follow-up specimen over the 12-week study period. The trial was registered on the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616000247471). FINDINGS: Between March 30, 2016, and Oct 26, 2018, 786 MSM were screened and 256 were excluded. 264 MSM were randomly assigned to the Biotène group and 266 to the Listerine group. The analysis population included 227 (86%) men in the Biotène group and 219 (82%) in the Listerine group. Oropharyngeal gonorrhoea was detected in ten (4%) of 227 of MSM in the Biotène group and in 15 (7%) of 219 in the Listerine group (adjusted risk difference 2·5%, 95% CI -1·8 to 6·8). The cumulative incidence of oropharyngeal gonorrhoea at the week 12 visit did not differ between the two mouthwash groups (adjusted risk difference 3·1%, 95% CI -1·4 to 7·7). INTERPRETATION: Listerine did not reduce the incidence of oropharyngeal gonorrhoea compared with Biotène. However, previous research suggests that mouthwash might reduce the infectivity of oropharyngeal gonorrhoea; therefore, further studies of mouthwash examining its inhibitory effect on N gonorrhoeae are warranted to determine if it has a potential role for the prevention of transmission. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Funding antiretroviral treatment for HIV-positive temporary residents in Australia prevents transmission and is inexpensive.

Background The aim of this study is to estimate the reduction in new HIV infections and resultant cost outcomes of providing antiretroviral treatment (ART) through Australia's 'universal access' health scheme to all temporary residents with HIV infection living legally in Australia, but currently deemed ineligible to access subsidised ART via this scheme. METHODS: A mathematical model to estimate the number of new HIV infections averted and the associated lifetime costs over 5 years if all HIV-positive temporary residents in Australia had access to ART and subsidised medical care was developed. Input data came from a cohort of 180 HIV-positive temporary residents living in Australia who are receiving free ART donated by pharmaceutical companies for up to 4 years. RESULTS: Expanding ART access to an estimated total 450 HIV+ temporary residents in Australia for 5 years could avert 80 new infections. The model estimated the total median discounted (5%) cost for ART and associated care to be A$36million, while the total savings in lifetime-discounted costs for the new infections averted was A$22million. CONCLUSIONS: It is estimated that expanded access to ART for all HIV-positive temporary residents in Australia will substantially reduce HIV transmission to their sexual partners at little additional cost. In the context of Australia's National HIV strategy and Australia's endorsement of global goals to provide universal access to ART for all people with HIV, this is an important measure to remove inequities in the provision of HIV-related treatment and care.

Comprehensiveness of HIV care provided at global HIV treatment sites in the IeDEA consortium: 2009 and 2014.

INTRODUCTION: An important determinant of the effectiveness of HIV treatment programs is the capacity of sites to implement recommended services and identify systematic changes needed to ensure that invested resources translate into improved patient outcomes. We conducted a survey in 2014 of HIV care and treatment sites in the seven regions of the International epidemiologic Database to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) Consortium to evaluate facility characteristics, HIV prevention, care and treatment services provided, laboratory capacity, and trends in the comprehensiveness of care compared to data obtained in the 2009 baseline survey. METHODS: Clinical staff from 262 treatment sites in 45 countries in IeDEA completed a site survey from September 2014 to January 2015, including Asia-Pacific with Australia (n = 50), Latin America and the Caribbean (n = 11), North America (n = 45), Central Africa (n = 17), East Africa (n = 36), Southern Africa (n = 87), and West Africa (n = 16). For the 55 sites with complete data from both the 2009 and 2014 survey, we evaluated change in comprehensiveness of care. RESULTS: The majority of the 262 sites (61%) offered seven essential services (ART adherence, nutritional support, PMTCT, CD4+ cell count testing, tuberculosis screening, HIV prevention, and outreach). Sites that were publicly funded (64%), cared for adults and children (68%), low or middle Human Development Index (HDI) rank (68%, 68%), and received PEPFAR support (71%) were most often fully comprehensive. CD4+ cell count testing was universally available (98%) but only 62% of clinics offered it onsite. Approximately two-thirds (69%) of sites reported routine viral load testing (44-100%), with 39% having it onsite. Laboratory capacity to monitor antiretroviral-related toxicity and diagnose opportunistic infections varied widely by testing modality and region. In the subgroup of 55 sites with two surveys, comprehensiveness of services provided significantly increased across all regions from 2009 to 2014 (5.7 to 6.5, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The availability of viral load monitoring remains suboptimal and should be a focus for site capacity, particularly in East and Southern Africa, where the majority of those initiating on ART reside. However, the comprehensiveness of care provided increased over the past 5 years and was related to type of funding received (publicly funded and PEPFAR supported).