A randomised trial in female sex workers in Zimbabwe,
offering enhanced access to HIV treatment and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), has failed to show that the
extra services helped reduce the proportion with detectable viral load, Frances Cowan told the 21st International AIDS Conference (AIDS 2016) in Durban today.
It appears that the comprehensive set of sex worker-friendly
services which were offered in the control arm may have already been enough to substantially
improve the health of participants.
While this set of services was described as the ‘usual care’
and is in line with World Health Organization guidelines, the reality is that a
comprehensive package of quality services for sex workers is rarely fully
delivered. The services
included free condoms and
contraception, HIV testing and counselling, referral to government clinics for HIV treatment, management of sexually transmitted infections, health
education and legal advice supported by a network of peer educators.
In seven communities – forming the control group – this package of care was provided.
In a
further seven communities – forming the intervention group – the same services
were provided, as well as the following additional elements:
- HIV treatment available at the sex worker clinic (rather
than referral to a government clinic)
- For women testing HIV-negative, SMS reminders to encourage
repeat HIV testing
- For women testing HIV-negative, the offer of PrEP
- Adherence support programme for women taking HIV treatment
or PrEP
- Intensified community mobilisation activities.
The communities, spread across Zimbabwe, were locations
where several hundred women
sold sex and where there was a primary care clinic providing dedicated
services to sex workers.
The primary endpoint was the proportion of female sex
workers who could be infectious with HIV, in other words with an HIV viral load above 1000 copies/ml. The trial was therefore innovative
in considering a woman with an undetectable viral load as equivalent to a woman
who does not have HIV.
When the trial began in 2013, approximately 200 female sex
workers were recruited in each community and tested for HIV antibodies and viral
load. In April this year, 200 female sex workers in each community (not necessarily the same
individuals) were recruited and tested in the same way.
The women were recruited through respondent-driven sampling
(RDS), in which the first women recruited by the researchers invite their peers
to participate too. Women who took part in the surveys were not necessarily
clients of the interventions, but were women living and working in the area.
Results
The study confirmed that female sex workers in Zimbabwe are
at extremely high risk of HIV. When the trial began, around six-in-ten
respondents were living with HIV, of whom two-thirds were aware of their
status. Of those aware of their status, two-thirds said they were taking HIV
treatment.
In that first survey, 30% of all women in both the control and
intervention groups had an HIV viral load above 1000 copies/ml.
In the survey at the end of the study, the proportion with
infectious HIV was substantially lower in both the control group (19%) and the
intervention group (16%). The difference between these figures was not
statistically significant. At the same time, the overall proportion of women
living with HIV did not change.
In other words, the proportion with infectious HIV decreased
over time in both groups. This may have been due to the services for sex
workers being of higher quality than they had previously been or access to HIV
treatment generally improving in the country. In any case, the additional
services provided in intervention communities did not make a substantial
difference to the final outcome.
The cascade of care was strong in both groups at the end of
the study. In the control group, 80% of women living with HIV had been
diagnosed, 83% of diagnosed women were on treatment and 88% of women on
treatment had an undetectable viral load. Results were similar in the
intervention group.
The results were similar despite a greater volume of clinic
activity in the intervention communities and women there having been much more
likely to be reached by peer education, community mobilisation or adherence
support.
When planning the study, the researchers expected the
on-site provision of HIV treatment to have a greater impact on the primary
outcome than the availability of PrEP. Nonetheless they note that demand for
PrEP was relatively limited in the intervention communities: while over 1300
women were offered PrEP, around 500 began it and only around 280 are still on
PrEP today.
Women expressed concerns about PrEP adherence and
side-effects, as well as suspicion about the manner in which PrEP was being
specifically targeted towards sex workers. For women who chose to take PrEP,
informal peer support from other sex workers, including women taking HIV
treatment, helped allay some of these concerns.
Frances Cowan concluded that the enhanced intervention did
not add a significant contribution on top of the existing programme to reducing
the proportion of sex workers in the community with a detectable viral load.