Determining reinfection rates by hepatitis C testing interval among key populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Detecting hepatitis C virus (HCV) reinfection among key populations helps prevent ongoing transmission. This systematic review aims to determine the association between different testing intervals during post-SVR follow-up on the detection of HCV reinfection among highest risk populations. METHODS: We searched electronic databases between January 2014 and February 2023 for studies that tested individuals at risk for HCV reinfection at discrete testing intervals and reported HCV reinfection incidence among key populations. Pooled estimates of reinfection incidence were calculated by population and testing frequency using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Forty-one single-armed observational studies (9453 individuals) were included. Thirty-eight studies (8931 individuals) reported HCV reinfection incidence rate and were included in meta-analyses. The overall pooled estimate of HCV reinfection incidence rate was 4.13 per 100 per person-years (py) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.45-4.81). The pooled incidence estimate among people who inject drugs (PWID) was 2.84 per 100 py (95% CI: 2.19-3.50), among men who have sex with men (MSM) 7.37 per 100 py (95% CI: 5.09-9.65) and among people in custodial settings 7.23 per 100 py (95% CI: 2.13-16.59). The pooled incidence estimate for studies reporting a testing interval of ≤6 months (4.26 per 100 py; 95% CI: 2.86-5.65) was higher than studies reporting testing intervals >6 months (5.19 per 100 py; 95% CI: 3.92-6.46). CONCLUSIONS: HCV reinfection incidence was highest in studies of MSM and did not appear to change with retesting interval. Shorter testing intervals are likely to identify more reinfections, help prevent onward transmission where treatment is available and enable progress towards global HCV elimination, but additional comparative studies are required.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention among people who inject drugs: a global mapping of service delivery.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for all people at substantial risk of HIV as part of combination prevention. The extent to which this recommendation has been implemented globally for people who inject drugs is unclear. This study mapped global service delivery of PrEP for people who inject drugs. METHODS: Between October and December 2021, a desk review was conducted to obtain information on PrEP services for people who inject drugs from drug user-led networks and HIV, harm reduction, and human rights stakeholders. Websites of organizations involved in HIV prevention or services for people who inject drugs were searched. Models of service delivery were described in terms of service location, provider, and package. RESULTS: PrEP services were identified in 27 countries (15 high-income). PrEP delivery models varied within and across countries. In most services, PrEP services were implemented in healthcare clinics without direct links to other harm reduction services. In three countries, PrEP services were also provided at methadone clinics. In 14 countries, PrEP services were provided through community-based models (outside of clinic settings) that commonly involved peer-led outreach activities and integration with harm reduction services. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates limited PrEP availability for people who inject drugs. There is potential to expand PrEP services for people who inject drugs within harm reduction programs, notably through community-based and peer-led services. PrEP should never be offered instead of evidence-based harm reduction programs for people who inject drugs; however, it could be offered as an additional HIV prevention choice as part of a comprehensive harm reduction program.

Web-Based Service Provision of HIV, Viral Hepatitis, and Sexually Transmitted Infection Prevention, Testing, Linkage, and Treatment for Key Populations: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the growth of web-based interventions for HIV, viral hepatitis (VH), and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) for key populations, the evidence for the effectiveness of these interventions has not been reported. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to inform the World Health Organization guidelines for HIV, VH, and STI prevention, diagnosis, and treatment services for key populations by systematically reviewing the effectiveness, values and preferences, and costs of web-based outreach, web-based case management, and targeted web-based health information for key populations (men who have sex with men, sex workers, people who inject drugs, trans and gender-diverse people, and people in prisons and other closed settings). METHODS: We searched CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Embase in May 2021 for peer-reviewed studies; screened abstracts; and extracted data in duplicate. The effectiveness review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for RCTs and the Evidence Project and Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tools for non-RCTs. Values and preferences and cost data were summarized descriptively. RESULTS: Of 2711 records identified, we included 13 (0.48%) articles in the effectiveness review (3/13, 23% for web-based outreach; 7/13, 54% for web-based case management; and 3/13, 23% for targeted web-based health information), 15 (0.55%) articles in the values and preferences review, and 1 (0.04%) article in the costs review. Nearly all studies were conducted among men who have sex with men in the United States. These articles provided evidence that web-based approaches are as effective as face-to-face services in terms of reaching new people, use of HIV, VH, and STI prevention services, and linkage to and retention in HIV care. A meta-analysis of 2 RCTs among men who have sex with men in China found increased HIV testing after web-based outreach (relative risk 1.39, 95% CI 1.21-1.60). Among men who have sex with men in the United States, such interventions were considered feasible and acceptable. One cost study among Canadian men who have sex with men found that syphilis testing campaign advertisements had the lowest cost-per-click ratio on hookup platforms compared with more traditional social media platforms. CONCLUSIONS: Web-based services for HIV, VH, and STIs may be a feasible and acceptable approach to expanding services to key populations with similar outcomes as standard of care, but more research is needed in low-resource settings, among key populations other than men who have sex with men, and for infections other than HIV (ie, VH and STIs).

Prevention of transmission of HIV, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and tuberculosis in prisoners.

The prevalence of HIV, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and tuberculosis are higher in prisons than in the general population in most countries worldwide. Prisons have emerged as a risk environment for these infections to be further concentrated, amplified, and then transmitted to the community after prisoners are released. In the absence of alternatives to incarceration, prisons and detention facilities could be leveraged to promote primary and secondary prevention strategies for these infections to improve prisoners health and reduce risk throughout incarceration and on release. Effective treatment of opioid use disorders with opioid agonist therapies (eg, methadone and buprenorphine) prevents blood-borne infections via reductions in injection in prison and after release. However, large gaps exist in the implementation of these strategies across all regions. Collaboration between the criminal justice and public health systems will be required for successful implementation of these strategies.

Attitudes and Acceptability on HIV Self-testing Among Key Populations: A Literature Review.

HIV self-testing (HIVST) is a potential strategy to overcome disparities in access to and uptake of HIV testing, particularly among key populations (KP). A literature review was conducted on the acceptability, values and preferences among KP. Data was analyzed by country income World Bank classification, type of specimen collection, level of support offered and other qualitative aspects. Most studies identified were from high-income countries and among men who have sex with men (MSM) who found HIVST to be acceptable. In general, MSM were interested in HIVST because of its convenient and private nature. However, they had concerns about the lack of counseling, possible user error and accuracy. Data on the values and preferences of other KP groups regarding HIVST is limited. This should be a research priority, as HIVST is likely to become more widely available, including in resource-limited settings.

Piloting a simplified bio-behavioural survey methodology, the BBS-Lite, among people who inject drugs in Georgia.

BACKGROUND: During 2021 and 2023 two simplified Biological and Behavioural Study (BBS-Lite) surveys, and in 2022 one Standard Integrated Biological and Behavioural Study (IBBS), were conducted among people who inject drugs in seven cities in Georgia. From these, an opportunity to compare the implementation of these survey methods and results was able to be gained. METHODS: The two survey types were compared to find points of similarity and difference in their methodologies. The methodologies of the IBBS and BBS-Lite studies shared many characteristics, including the cities where they were implemented, recruitment criteria, sample sizes, and common questionnaire items. All studies were multi-centre cross-sectional involving administration of a face-to-face behavioural questionnaire and collection of biological specimens for testing of HIV, syphilis, hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV). The main differences were in the sampling methods. The IBBS utilised respondent-driven sampling (RDS) while participants of the BBS-Lite studies were enrolled through consecutive recruitment at the harm reduction (HR) programme sites and on outreach and through snowball sampling. We compared the results from each study as well as the implementation modalities such as time taken and budgetary requirements, and the complexity of implementation. RESULTS: Considerably less time was required for recruitment, as well as for interviewing, data entry (4 times less) and the analysis for the BSS-Lite studies compared to the IBBS. The BSS-Lite study budgets were at least 2.5 times less than of the IBBS study. The recruited samples were comparable for age distribution, median age at first injection, the last drug injected, sharing of drug injecting equipment or receiving opioid agonist maintenance treatment (OAMT) during the last 12 months. HIV and HCV prevalence were similar including for stratifications by age, client status and city of recruitment. CONCLUSION: Our findings have demonstrated that if implemented on a regular basis, the BBS-Lite can be a complementary solution for systematic data collection, filling surveillance gaps and addressing the challenges that persist in obtaining important data on people who inject drugs (PWID) between IBBS rounds in the country. The methodology is recommended for testing in other settings and in other key populations. In addition, the data collected on a routine base can help the harm reduction (HR) program to better understand the changes in the drug scene and observe new trends in HIV risks and drug injecting behaviours, possible barriers for access to harm reduction, drug treatment, and HIV and/or viral hepatitis testing and treatment services.

Do Peer Navigators Improve Initiation and Retention in HIV/VH/STI Treatment Programs for People From Key Populations? A Systematic Review of Effectiveness, Values and Preferences, and Cost.

BACKGROUND: Key populations are disproportionately affected by HIV, viral hepatitis (VH), and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and face barriers to care. Peer navigation programs are widely used, but evidence supporting their use has not been synthesized. SETTING: Peer navigation programs for sex workers, men who have sex with men, people who inject drugs, prisoners, and trans and gender diverse people globally. METHODS: To inform World Health Organization guidelines, we conducted a systematic review of effectiveness, values and preferences, and cost studies published between January 2010 and May 2021. We searched CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, and EMBASE; screened abstracts; and extracted data in duplicate. The effectiveness review included randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies evaluating time to diagnosis or linkage to care, treatment initiation, treatment retention/completion, viral load, cure, or mortality. We assessed risk of bias and summarized findings in GRADE evidence profiles. Values and preferences and cost data were summarized descriptively. RESULTS: Four studies evaluated the effectiveness of peer navigators for key populations. All were focused on HIV; none were designed for VH or STIs. These studies showed mixed effects on linkage to care, treatment retention/completion, and viral load; no studies measured treatment initiation, cure, or mortality. Two values and preferences studies with community-based organization staff and health workers suggested peer navigators for key populations were acceptable and valued, although continued challenges remained. No cost studies were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Although limited, available studies provide moderate certainty evidence for benefits of HIV/VH/STI peer navigation programs for key populations. Further evaluations are needed.

Counselling behavioural interventions for HIV, STI and viral hepatitis among key populations: a systematic review of effectiveness, values and preferences, and cost studies.

INTRODUCTION: Key populations (sex workers, men who have sex with men, people who inject drugs, people in prisons and other closed settings, and trans and gender diverse individuals) are disproportionately affected by HIV, sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and viral hepatitis (VH). Counselling behavioural interventions are widely used, but their impact on HIV/STI/VH acquisition is unclear. METHODS: To inform World Health Organization guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness, values and preferences, and cost studies about counselling behavioural interventions with key populations. We searched CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed and EMBASE for studies published between January 2010 and December 2022; screened abstracts; and extracted data in duplicate. The effectiveness review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with HIV/STI/VH incidence outcomes; secondary review outcomes of unprotected sex, needle/syringe sharing and mortality were captured if studies also included primary review outcomes. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration tool, generated pooled risk ratios through random effects meta-analysis and summarized findings in GRADE evidence profiles. Values and preferences and cost data were summarized descriptively. RESULTS: We identified nine effectiveness, two values and preferences, and two cost articles. Meta-analysis of six RCTs showed no statistically significant effect of counselling behavioural interventions on HIV incidence (1280 participants; combined risk ratio [RR]: 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-1.20) or STI incidence (3783 participants; RR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.74-1.31). One RCT with 139 participants showed possible effects on hepatitis C virus incidence. There was no effect on secondary review outcomes of unprotected (condomless) sex (seven RCTs; 1811 participants; RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.66-1.02) and needle/syringe sharing (two RCTs; 564 participants; RR 0.72; 95% CI: 0.32-1.63). There was moderate certainty in the lack of effect across outcomes. Two values and preferences studies found that participants liked specific counselling behavioural interventions. Two cost studies found reasonable intervention costs. DISCUSSION: Evidence was limited and mostly on HIV, but showed no effect of counselling behavioural interventions on HIV/VH/STI incidence among key populations. CONCLUSIONS: While there may be other benefits, the choice to provide counselling behavioural interventions for key populations should be made with an understanding of the potential limitations on incidence outcomes.

Immediate treatment for recent hepatitis C infection in people with high-risk behaviors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are almost exclusively approved for the treatment of chronic HCV. This poses a significant barrier to the treatment of recently acquired HCV because of the limited access to DAAs. This review seeks to address this issue by synthesizing evidence of the benefits and harms of immediate treatment after the detection of recently acquired HCV in people at higher risk of infection. APPROACH AND RESULTS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted reporting on populations with recently acquired HCV at higher risk of infection. Studies were included if they assessed standard duration DAA treatment regimens and reported on the benefits and harms of immediate treatment (within one year of diagnosis). Outcomes included sustained virological response at 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12), incidence, treatment initiation and adherence, overtreatment, engagement in care, and adverse events. Eight cohort studies, 3 open-label trials, and 1 case series study were included, reporting on 2085 participants with recently acquired HCV infection. No studies included a comparison group. Eight studies assessed DAA treatment in either men who have sex with men or men who have sex with men with HIV, 2 studies assessed treatment in people who inject drugs, and 2 among people living with HIV. Immediate treatment of HCV was associated with a pooled SVR12 of 95.9% (95% CI, 92.6%-99.3%). Three studies reported on hepatitis C incidence, where most participants were treated in the chronic phase of infection. A treatment completion rate of 100% was reported in 2 studies, and only 1 serious adverse event was described. CONCLUSIONS: High rates of cure were achieved with the treatment of recently acquired hepatitis C in people at higher risk of infection. Serious adverse events were rare, highlighting individual benefits consistent with the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. The impact of immediate treatment on HCV incidence requires further evaluation.

The World Health Organization's work and recommendations for improving the health of trans and gender diverse people.

INTRODUCTION: The World Health Organization (WHO) is guided by its global programme of work and the goal that a billion more people have universal health coverage (UHC). To achieve UHC, access for those most vulnerable must be guaranteed and prioritized. WHO is committed to developing evidence-based guidance to work towards UHC for trans and gender diverse (TGD) people. This commentary describes WHO's work related to TGD people over the last decade. DISCUSSION: In 2011, WHO developed guidelines for the prevention and treatment of HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in men who have sex with men and TGD people. In 2013, the "HIV civil society reference group" called on WHO to provide specific guidance for TGD people. Values and preferences of TGD people were considered by WHO for the first time, which informed the development of the 2014 WHO Consolidated Guidelines on HIV Prevention, Diagnosis, Treatment and Care for Key Populations. The 2014 Guidelines included a comprehensive package of HIV-related health and enabling interventions with specific considerations for TGD people, as well as a specific policy brief in 2015. Regional WHO offices developed and/or supported the development of blueprints on transgender health and HIV in 2014 and 2016. A 2015 WHO report on sexual health, human rights and the law elucidated the harmful impacts of discriminatory laws on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. In 2019, the 11th edition of the international classification of diseases saw the removal of "transsexualism" as a mental and behavioural disorder. WHO's first guideline on self-care interventions, updated in 2021, included key considerations concerning TGD people. In 2022, WHO's updated key populations guidelines include a prioritized package of not just HIV, but also viral hepatitis and STI health interventions for TGD people. Still, a broader and more specific health approach and a greater focus on social issues are needed to better serve the health needs of TGD people. CONCLUSIONS: WHO's understanding and commitment to TGD people's health has evolved and improved over the past decade. Together with professional and community trans health organizations, WHO should now start developing evidence-informed global guidance on TGD health as part of its remit to support UHC to all.

Oral naltrexone maintenance treatment for opioid dependence.

BACKGROUND: Research on the clinical application of oral naltrexone agrees on several things. From a pharmacological perspective, naltrexone works. From an applied perspective, however, the medication compliance and the retention rates are very poor. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of naltrexone maintenance treatment versus placebo or other treatments in preventing relapse in opioid addicts after detoxification. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL - The Cochrane Library issue 6 2010), PubMed (1973- June 2010), CINAHL (1982- June 2010). We inspected reference lists of relevant articles and we contacted pharmaceutical producers of naltrexone, authors and other Cochrane review groups. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and controlled clinical trials which focus on the use of naltrexone maintenance treatment versus placebo, or other treatments to reach sustained abstinence from opiate drugs DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. One reviewer carried out the qualitative assessments of the methodology of eligible studies using validated checklists. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen studies, 1158 participants, met the criteria for inclusion in this review.Comparing naltrexone versus placebo or no pharmacological treatments, no statistically significant difference were noted for all the primary outcomes considered. The only outcome statistically significant in favour of naltrexone is re incarceration, RR 0.47 (95%CI 0.26-0.84), but results come only from two studies.Comparing naltrexone versus psychotherapy, in the two considered outcomes, no statistically significant difference was found in the single study considered.Naltrexone was not superior to benzodiazepines and to buprenorphine for retention and abstinence and side effects. Results come from single studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review suggest that oral naltrexone did not perform better than treatment with placebo or no pharmacological agent with respect to the number of participants re-incarcerated during the study period. If oral naltrexone is compared with other pharmacological treatments such as benzodiazepine and buprenorphine, no statistically significant difference was found. The percentage of people retained in treatment in the included studies is however low (28%). The conclusion of this review is that the studies conducted have not allowed an adequate evaluation of oral naltrexone treatment in the field of opioid dependence. Consequently, maintenance therapy with naltrexone cannot yet be considered a treatment which has been scientifically proved to be superior to other kinds of treatment.

Oral naltrexone maintenance treatment for opioid dependence.

BACKGROUND: Research on clinical application of oral naltrexone agrees on several things. From a pharmacological perspective, naltrexone works. From an applied perspective, the medication compliance and the retention rates are poor. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of naltrexone maintenance treatment versus placebo or other treatments in preventing relapse in opioid addicts after detoxification. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL - The Cochrane Library issue 6 2010), PubMed (1973- June 2010), CINAHL (1982- June 2010). We inspected reference lists of relevant articles and contacted pharmaceutical producers of naltrexone, authors and other Cochrane review groups. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled clinical trials which focus on the use of naltrexone maintenance treatment versus placebo, or other treatments to reach sustained abstinence from opiate drugs DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. One reviewer carried out the qualitative assessments of the methodology of eligible studies using validated checklists. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen studies, 1158 participants, met the criteria for inclusion in this review.Comparing naltrexone versus placebo or no pharmacological treatments, no statistically significant difference were noted for all the primary outcomes considered. The only outcome statistically significant in favour of naltrexone is re incarceration, RR 0.47 (95%CI 0.26-0.84), but results come only from two studies. Considering only studies were patients were forced to adherence a statistical significant difference in favour of naltrexone was found for retention and abstinence, RR 2.93 (95%CI 1.66-5.18).Comparing naltrexone versus psychotherapy, in the two considered outcomes, no statistically significant difference was found in the single study considered.Naltrexone was not superior to benzodiazepines and to buprenorphine for retention and abstinence and side effects. Results come from single studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review suggest that oral naltrexone did not perform better than treatment with placebo or no pharmacological agent with respect to the number of participants re-incarcerated during the study period. If oral naltrexone is compared with other pharmacological treatments such as benzodiazepine and buprenorphine, no statistically significant difference was found. The percentage of people retained in treatment in the included studies is however low (28%). The conclusion of this review is that the studies conducted have not allowed an adequate evaluation of oral naltrexone treatment in the field of opioid dependence. Consequently, maintenance therapy with naltrexone cannot yet be considered a treatment which has been scientifically proved to be superior to other kinds of treatment.

Values and preferences of contraceptive methods: a mixed-methods study among sex workers from diverse settings.

There is limited information on contraceptive values and preferences of sex workers. We conducted a mixed-method study to explore contraceptive values and preferences among sex workers. We conducted an online survey with individuals from 38 countries (n = 239), 6 focus group discussions (FGD, n = 68) in Zimbabwe, and 12 in-depth phone interviews (IDI) across 4 world regions, in June and July of 2019. Participants were asked about awareness of contraceptives, methods they had used in the past, and the determinants of their choices. Differences between respondents from high-, low- and middle- income countries were examined. Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Survey participants reported an awareness of modern contraceptive methods. FGDs found that younger women had lower awareness. Reports of condomless sex were common and modern contraceptive use was inconsistent. Determinants of contraceptive choices differed by setting according to results of the survey, FGD, and IDI. Regardless of country income level, determinants of contraceptive choices included ease of use, ease of access to a contraceptive method, and fewer side effects. Healthcare provider attitudes, availability of methods, and clinic schedules were important considerations. Most sex workers are aware of contraceptives, but barriers include male partners/clients, side effects, and health system factors such as access and clinic attitudes towards sex workers.

Prevalence and incidence of hepatitis C virus infection in men who have sex with men: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: WHO has set targets for hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination by 2030. We did a global systematic review of HCV prevalence and incidence in men who have sex with men (MSM) to provide updated estimates that can guide community education and public health policy. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published and listed on MEDLINE or Embase between Jan 1, 2000, and Oct 31, 2019, including conference proceedings. Studies were eligible if they reported measures of HCV prevalence or HCV incidence (or both) among MSM. Studies that relied on participants' self-reported HCV status with no laboratory confirmation were excluded. Pooled HCV estimates in MSM were stratified by HIV status and by injecting drug use, then by WHO region and by income level. Random-effects meta-analysis was done to account for between-study heterogeneity and examined using the I2 statistic. Pooled HCV prevalence was also compared with HCV estimates in the general population and presented as prevalence ratios (PRs). In HIV-negative MSM, incidence estimates were stratified by use of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). The systematic review was registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42020156262. FINDINGS: Of 1221 publications identified, 194 were deemed to be eligible and included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Overall, the pooled HCV prevalence in MSM was 3·4% (95% CI 2·8-4·0; I2=98·0%) and was highest in Africa (5·8%, 2·5-10·4) and South-East Asia (5·0%, 0·0-16·6). Globally, HCV prevalence was 1·5% (1·0-2·1) in HIV-negative MSM and 6·3% (5·3-7·5) in HIV-positive MSM. Compared with the general population, HCV prevalence was slightly higher in HIV-negative MSM (PR 1·58, 95% CI 1·14-2·01) and markedly higher (6·22, 5·14-7·29) in HIV-positive MSM. Pooled HCV prevalence was substantially higher in MSM who had ever injected drugs (30·2%, 22·0-39·0) or currently injected drugs (45·6%, 21·6-70·7) than in those who never injected drugs (2·7%, 2·0-3·6). In HIV-negative MSM, the pooled HCV incidence was 0·12 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 0·00-0·72) in individuals not on PrEP and 14·80 per 1000 person-years (9·65-20·95) in individuals on PrEP. HCV incidence in HIV-positive MSM was 8·46 per 1000 person-years (6·78-10·32). INTERPRETATION: HIV-positive MSM are at substantially increased risk of HCV. Overall, HIV-negative MSM had a slightly higher prevalence of HCV than the general population but had a lower prevalence than HIV-positive MSM. High HCV incidence in more recent PrEP studies suggests that as PrEP use increases, greater HCV transmission might occur. HCV burden in MSM varies considerably by region, which is likely to be associated with variation in the prevalence of injecting drug use and HIV. FUNDING: World Health Organization.

Prevalence of pretreatment HIV drug resistance in key populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: WHO's 2019 report on HIV drug resistance (HIVDR) documents a high prevalence of pretreatment drug resistance (PDR) among populations initiating first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). However, systematic evidence on the prevalence of PDR among key populations remains limited. We performed a systematic review to characterize levels of PDR in key population groups and compared them to levels of PDR in the "general population" across different geographical regions. METHODS: Ten electronic databases were searched for papers published until February 2019 that included predefined search terms. We included studies that reported the number of successfully tested genotypes and the number of genotypes with drug resistance mutations among antiretroviral therapy treatment naïve people, recently infected people, or people initiating first-line ART from key populations. To assess the prevalence of PDR for each key population, we pooled estimates using random-effects meta-analysis of proportions. Where possible, we computed the differences in the odds of PDR (any, and by drug class) present in each key population compared to the "general population". The I2 statistic (a measure of heterogeneity between studies) is reported. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A total of 332 datasets (from 218 studies) and 63,111 people with successful HIVDR genotyping were included in the analysis. The pooled prevalence estimate of any PDR was high among men who have sex with men (13.0%, 95% CI 11.0 to 14.0%, I2  = 93.19), sex workers (17.0%, 95% CI 6.0 - 32.0, I2  = 87.31%) and people in prisons (18.0%, 95% CI 11.0 to 25.0, I2  = 70.18%), but less so among people who inject drugs (7.0%, 95% CI 5.0 to 10.0, I2  = 90.23). Overall, men who have sex with men were more likely to carry any PDR compared to the "general population," a finding which was statistically significant (odds ratio (OR) 1.28, 95% CI 1.13 - 1.46, I2 48.9%). CONCLUSIONS: High prevalence of PDR found in key populations highlights the need to increase access to effective first-line HIV treatment. The low prevalence of nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) PDR suggests that current WHO recommendations for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) regimens will remain effective and can be scaled up to prevent new HIV infections in high-risk groups.

Interventions to reduce HIV transmission related to injecting drug use in prison.

The high prevalence of HIV infection and drug dependence among prisoners, combined with the sharing of injecting drug equipment, make prisons a high-risk environment for the transmission of HIV. Ultimately, this contributes to HIV epidemics in the communities to which prisoners return on their release. We reviewed the effectiveness of interventions to reduce injecting drug use risk behaviours and, consequently, HIV transmission in prisons. Many studies reported high levels of injecting drug use in prisons, and HIV transmission has been documented. There is increasing evidence of what prison systems can do to prevent HIV transmission related to injecting drug use. In particular, needle and syringe programmes and opioid substitution therapies have proven effective at reducing HIV risk behaviours in a wide range of prison environments, without resulting in negative consequences for the health of prison staff or prisoners. The introduction of these programmes in countries with an existing or emergent epidemic of HIV infection among injecting drug users is therefore warranted, as part of comprehensive programmes to address HIV in prisons.

Prisons: ignore them at our peril.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: People with HIV and HCV are concentrated within criminal justice settings globally, primarily related to criminalization of drug use. This review examines updated prevention and treatment strategies for HIV and HCV within prison with a focus on people who inject drugs and the challenges associated with the provision of these services within prisons and other closed settings and transition to the community. RECENT FINDINGS: The prevalence of HIV and HCV are several-fold higher in the criminal justice system than within the broader community particularly in regions with high prevalence of injecting drug use, such as Asia, Eastern Europe and North America and where drug use is criminalized. Strategies to optimize management for these infections include routine screening linked to treatment within these settings and medication-assisted treatments for opioid dependence and access to syringe services programs. We build upon the 2016 WHO Consolidated Guidelines through the lens of the key populations of prisoners. Linkage to treatment postrelease, has been universally dismal, but is improved when linked to medication-assisted therapies like methadone, buprenorphine and overdose management. In many prisons, particularly in low-income and middle-income settings, provision of even basic healthcare including mental healthcare and basic HIV prevention tools remain suboptimal. SUMMARY: In order to address HIV and HCV prevention and treatment within criminal justice settings, substantial improvement in the delivery of basic healthcare is needed in many prisons worldwide together with effective screening, treatment and linkage of treatment and prevention services to medication-assisted therapies within prison and linkage to care after release.

Universal health coverage and key populations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is renewed focus at global and national level to adopt commitments to ensure universal access to health services. The present study highlights key considerations to ensure that the commitment to 'leave no one behind' includes key populations, recognizing the specific impact of marginalization, stigma, discrimination, and criminalization on their access to health. RECENT FINDINGS: Universal health coverage (UHC) means that all people can use the promotive, preventive, curative, rehabilitative, and palliative health services they need, of sufficient quality to be effective, while also ensuring that the use of these services does not expose the user to financial hardship. Countries commit to UHC through Sustainable Development Goals (SDG Target 3.8 Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care services and access to well tolerated, effective, quality, and affordable essential medicines). SUMMARY: UHC cannot be achieved without addressing the needs of key populations. At the same time, the goal of UHC provides new opportunities to improve health equity and the health of key populations. Political commitment, defining and including essential high-impact, evidence-based interventions for key populations, and their full integration into national health benefit packages; integrated, decentralized, and differentiated health services with involvement, ownership, and acceptance of communities to ensure equity and quality; ensuring financing for UHC provides coverage for key populations, including those who may be undocumented, are needed. Developing more effective interventions and service delivery approaches, providing a supportive policy and legal environment; and measuring progress against clear targets for accountability and programme adjustment will also be required for key populations to benefit fully from UHC.

Transforming lives and empowering communities: evidence, harm reduction and a holistic approach to people who use drugs.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We reviewed the global state of harm reduction for people who use and/or inject drugs. KEY FINDINGS: Although harm reduction is now the key response to HIV among people who use drugs globally, intervention coverage remains suboptimal, exacerbated by chronic under-funding, declining donor support and limited domestic investment, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. We describe the current environment and review recent innovations and responses, including peer distribution of naloxone, low dead space syringes, drug consumption rooms and drug-checking services. However, despite efforts by people who use drugs and supporting partners to sustain harm reduction services and to develop and implement novel interventions, programmes are often under-scaled and under-resourced and people who use drugs continue to face significant barriers to accessing services. SUMMARY: There is an urgent need to bring existing harm reduction programmes to scale and to broaden their scope, as well to complement them with innovative interventions targeting new populations and new substances. Under and disinvestment in harm reduction and the absence of enabling legal environments threatens to undermine the global HIV response and exacerbate the morbidity and mortality associated with the current epidemic of opioid overdose.