Cargando…

The Role of HIV Partner Services in the Modern Biomedical HIV Prevention Era: A Network Modeling Study

HIV partner services can accelerate the use of antiretroviral-based HIV prevention tools (antiretroviral therapy [ART] and preexposure prophylaxis [PrEP]), but its population impact on long-term HIV incidence reduction is challenging to quantify with traditional partner services metrics of partner i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jenness, Samuel M., Le Guillou, Adrien, Lyles, Cynthia, Bernstein, Kyle T., Krupinsky, Kathryn, Enns, Eva A., Sullivan, Patrick S., Delaney, Kevin P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9668377/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36194831
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000001711
_version_ 1784831898737967104
author Jenness, Samuel M.
Le Guillou, Adrien
Lyles, Cynthia
Bernstein, Kyle T.
Krupinsky, Kathryn
Enns, Eva A.
Sullivan, Patrick S.
Delaney, Kevin P.
author_facet Jenness, Samuel M.
Le Guillou, Adrien
Lyles, Cynthia
Bernstein, Kyle T.
Krupinsky, Kathryn
Enns, Eva A.
Sullivan, Patrick S.
Delaney, Kevin P.
author_sort Jenness, Samuel M.
collection PubMed
description HIV partner services can accelerate the use of antiretroviral-based HIV prevention tools (antiretroviral therapy [ART] and preexposure prophylaxis [PrEP]), but its population impact on long-term HIV incidence reduction is challenging to quantify with traditional partner services metrics of partner identified or HIV screened. Understanding the role of partner services within the portfolio of HIV prevention interventions, including using it to efficiently deliver antiretrovirals, is needed to achieve HIV prevention targets. METHODS: We used a stochastic network model of HIV/sexually transmitted infection transmission for men who have sex with men, calibrated to surveillance-based estimates in the Atlanta area, a jurisdiction with high HIV burden and suboptimal partner services uptake. Model scenarios varied successful delivery of partner services cascade steps (newly diagnosed “index” patient and partner identification, partner HIV screening, and linkage or reengagement of partners in PrEP or ART care) individually and jointly. RESULTS: At current levels observed in Atlanta, removal of HIV partner services had minimal impact on 10-year cumulative HIV incidence, as did improving a single partner services step while holding the others constant. These changes did not sufficiently impact overall PrEP or ART coverage to reduce HIV transmission. If all index patients and partners were identified, maximizing partner HIV screening, partner PrEP provision, partner ART linkage, and partner ART reengagement would avert 6%, 11%, 5%, and 18% of infections, respectively. Realistic improvements in partner identification and service delivery were estimated to avert 2% to 8% of infections, depending on the combination of improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Achieving optimal HIV prevention with partner services depends on pairing improvements in index patient and partner identification with maximal delivery of HIV screening, ART, and PrEP to partners if indicated. Improving the identification steps without improvement to antiretroviral service delivery steps, or vice versa, is projected to result in negligible population HIV prevention benefit.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9668377
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96683772022-11-21 The Role of HIV Partner Services in the Modern Biomedical HIV Prevention Era: A Network Modeling Study Jenness, Samuel M. Le Guillou, Adrien Lyles, Cynthia Bernstein, Kyle T. Krupinsky, Kathryn Enns, Eva A. Sullivan, Patrick S. Delaney, Kevin P. Sex Transm Dis Original Studies HIV partner services can accelerate the use of antiretroviral-based HIV prevention tools (antiretroviral therapy [ART] and preexposure prophylaxis [PrEP]), but its population impact on long-term HIV incidence reduction is challenging to quantify with traditional partner services metrics of partner identified or HIV screened. Understanding the role of partner services within the portfolio of HIV prevention interventions, including using it to efficiently deliver antiretrovirals, is needed to achieve HIV prevention targets. METHODS: We used a stochastic network model of HIV/sexually transmitted infection transmission for men who have sex with men, calibrated to surveillance-based estimates in the Atlanta area, a jurisdiction with high HIV burden and suboptimal partner services uptake. Model scenarios varied successful delivery of partner services cascade steps (newly diagnosed “index” patient and partner identification, partner HIV screening, and linkage or reengagement of partners in PrEP or ART care) individually and jointly. RESULTS: At current levels observed in Atlanta, removal of HIV partner services had minimal impact on 10-year cumulative HIV incidence, as did improving a single partner services step while holding the others constant. These changes did not sufficiently impact overall PrEP or ART coverage to reduce HIV transmission. If all index patients and partners were identified, maximizing partner HIV screening, partner PrEP provision, partner ART linkage, and partner ART reengagement would avert 6%, 11%, 5%, and 18% of infections, respectively. Realistic improvements in partner identification and service delivery were estimated to avert 2% to 8% of infections, depending on the combination of improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Achieving optimal HIV prevention with partner services depends on pairing improvements in index patient and partner identification with maximal delivery of HIV screening, ART, and PrEP to partners if indicated. Improving the identification steps without improvement to antiretroviral service delivery steps, or vice versa, is projected to result in negligible population HIV prevention benefit. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-12 2022-09-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9668377/ /pubmed/36194831 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000001711 Text en Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Original Studies
Jenness, Samuel M.
Le Guillou, Adrien
Lyles, Cynthia
Bernstein, Kyle T.
Krupinsky, Kathryn
Enns, Eva A.
Sullivan, Patrick S.
Delaney, Kevin P.
The Role of HIV Partner Services in the Modern Biomedical HIV Prevention Era: A Network Modeling Study
title The Role of HIV Partner Services in the Modern Biomedical HIV Prevention Era: A Network Modeling Study
title_full The Role of HIV Partner Services in the Modern Biomedical HIV Prevention Era: A Network Modeling Study
title_fullStr The Role of HIV Partner Services in the Modern Biomedical HIV Prevention Era: A Network Modeling Study
title_full_unstemmed The Role of HIV Partner Services in the Modern Biomedical HIV Prevention Era: A Network Modeling Study
title_short The Role of HIV Partner Services in the Modern Biomedical HIV Prevention Era: A Network Modeling Study
title_sort role of hiv partner services in the modern biomedical hiv prevention era: a network modeling study
topic Original Studies
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9668377/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36194831
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000001711
work_keys_str_mv AT jennesssamuelm theroleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT leguillouadrien theroleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT lylescynthia theroleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT bernsteinkylet theroleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT krupinskykathryn theroleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT ennsevaa theroleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT sullivanpatricks theroleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT delaneykevinp theroleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT jennesssamuelm roleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT leguillouadrien roleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT lylescynthia roleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT bernsteinkylet roleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT krupinskykathryn roleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT ennsevaa roleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT sullivanpatricks roleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy
AT delaneykevinp roleofhivpartnerservicesinthemodernbiomedicalhivpreventioneraanetworkmodelingstudy