Phylogenetic analysis of the source of HIV infections in
Dutch gay men over more than a decade shows that 71% acquired HIV from a man
who was himself not yet diagnosed and only 6% from a man who was taking
treatment, Oliver Ratmann and colleagues report in this week’s issue of Science Translational Medicine.
Examining what could have been different if prevention
activities were scaled up, the researchers estimate that a combination of annual
HIV testing, PrEP for half of all HIV-negative gay men and immediate HIV
treatment for those testing positive could have averted two thirds of these
transmissions. They say the results highlight the importance of combining the interventions
– singular approaches would have much less impact.
Understanding which interventions could make a difference to
the Dutch gay epidemic is an important case study, they say. The substantial
scale-up of HIV treatment there has not stemmed new HIV infections. Although
90% of diagnosed men are on treatment, 91% of those on treatment are undetectable
and 95% of diagnosed men are retained in care, HIV incidence is stable or
increasing. Other developed countries, including the UK, have a similar
problem.
Sources of HIV transmission
The researchers analysed the genetic characteristics of
stored blood samples obtained from Dutch patients living with HIV. Using a
technique called phylogenetic analysis, they looked for infections with similar
genetic profiles which were likely to constitute transmission events.
They first identified gay men who were diagnosed with HIV
between 1996 and 2010 who probably acquired HIV less than a year before their
diagnosis. They then attempted to pair their blood samples with those of other men
who had HIV at the time the transmission is likely to have occurred and who may
have been responsible for it. This entailed looking at blood samples of men who
were already diagnosed at the time and also of men who were only diagnosed (and
provided a blood sample) some years later. Since most people living with HIV in
the Netherlands have samples in the database analysed, a significant proportion
of transmission pairs could be identified.
Of 1045 recently diagnosed gay men who had a blood sample
available for analysis, 617 could be paired with one or more probable
transmitters. In total there were 903 probable transmitters and 2343 pairs. The
researchers determined whether a probable transmitter was diagnosed and taking
treatment at the time of suspected transmission.
This showed that:
- 71% of transmissions originated in undiagnosed men
- 22% originated in men who were diagnosed and not yet taking
treatment
- 6% originated in men were taking treatment
- 1% originated in men who had dropped out of medical care.
Moreover, 43% of those transmitting HIV had themselves only had it for less than a year.
The researchers note the very limited number of transmitters
who were taking HIV treatment, confirming that treatment is highly effective in
preventing transmission. Similarly, only 1% of transmissions came from men who
were lost to follow-up.
“The lack of
substantial reductions in incidence among Dutch MSM is not a result of
ineffective ART provision or inadequate retention in care,” they comment.
While a fifth of transmissions did come from diagnosed men
who were not yet on treatment, this is a historical sample (up to 2010) and HIV
treatment has been scaled up since then. It is likely that data for more recent
years would show fewer transmissions from this group.
Prevention priorities
The researchers then modelled the proportions of
transmissions that could have been avoided if various health interventions had
been available. They looked specifically at the period 2008 to 2010,
considering these possible interventions:
- Immediate HIV treatment for all men diagnosed with HIV
- PrEP for half the HIV-negative gay men aged under 30
- Annual HIV testing for half the gay men who transmit HIV.
The researchers comment on the difficulty of achieving high
rates of HIV testing in those most likely to be involved in transmission. Their
data suggest that these men test less frequently than other gay men, but it is
not clear how health services can reach these individuals or identify them.
If only immediate treatment had been offered, 19% of
infections could have been averted. Combining immediate treatment and PrEP
would have prevented 30% of infections. The greatest results would be seen by
combining these with annual testing, averting 45% of infections.
Expanding PrEP access to half of all gay men (rather than
just those under the age of 30) would prevent 66% of infections.
“This study indicates that substantial reductions in HIV
incidence among MSM could have been realized with a combination approach that
includes – critically – increased annual testing, with uptake of PrEP by young
MSM testing negative and provision of immediate ART to those testing positive,”
the authors say.
They believe that the most important implications for
prevention programmes are for a scale-up of HIV testing and of PrEP. As
coverage of HIV treatment has already been considerably expanded since the
period of study, there is limited potential in making further changes to
treatment guidelines. The focus must therefore be on intensifying prevention
interventions for HIV-negative people.
“Increased annual testing and uptake of PrEP by men at high
risk of infection have a key role to send the HIV epidemic among MSM into a
decisive decline,” they conclude.