Final follow up of the HPTN 052 study of treatment as
prevention shows no evidence of HIV transmission from people with fully
suppressed viral load to their partners, four years after the first results
from the study demonstrated that early HIV treatment reduced the risk of HIV
transmission by 96%. These results were presented by Professor Myron Cohen at the Eighth International AIDS
Society Conference on HIV Pathogenesis, Treatment and Prevention (IAS 2015) in Vancouver, Canada,
on Monday.
Describing the results as “the final word” from HPTN 052, Professor
Cohen, of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, presented a final intent-to-treat
analysis of the study, which
demonstrated in 2011 that early antiretroviral treatment greatly reduced the
risk of HIV transmission to serodiscordant partners. The study compared the
rates of transmission between two study arms: a deferred treatment arm, in
which people diagnosed with HIV started treatment at a CD4 count of 250
cells/mm3 or if they developed an AIDS-defining illness prior to
reaching this threshold; and an immediate treatment arm, in which people with
CD4 cell counts in the range 350-550 cells/mm3 started treatment
immediately. The interim analysis showed a 96% reduction in the risk of HIV
transmission.
The final intent-to-treat analysis reported on 1,763
couples, of which 1,171 (66%) remained in follow up (603 of 886 in the
immediate treatment arm and 568 of 877 in the deferred treatment arm). The
study accumulated 9822 person-years of follow up of HIV-positive participants.
A total of 28 infections that could be genetically linked to
the index partner took place during the study up until the time of the interim
analysis in 2011, one in the early treatment arm and 27 in the deferred arm. This
represented a 96% risk reduction.
After the interim analysis and the offer of antiretroviral
therapy to all participants in the deferred treatment arm, a total of nine
genetically linked infections occurred: two in the early arm and seven in the
deferred arm. This represented a 72% risk reduction, but overall, the risk
reduction associated with early treatment was 93%. Professor Cohen said that
intent-to-treat analysis represents a conservative estimate of efficacy,
pointing to the fact that infections which occurred after treatment had been
started had occurred when viral load was not fully suppressed.
Timing of infections shows window of risk in weeks after starting treatment
Overall, eight infections occurred after the index partner
had started treatment: four just before or very soon after starting treatment,
and four after virological failure of treatment. Susan Eshleman of Johns
Hopkins University presented results of a detailed analysis of these
transmissions, using blood tests and genetic analysis, to pinpoint when they
occurred.
Apart from antigen-antibody testing and viral load testing,
the analysis also used techniques of genetic analysis to determine how much the
virus in the infected partner had evolved compared with the virus of the index
partner, in order to estimate the timing of transmission. In each of the four
cases transmission was estimated to have occurred before viral suppression had
been achieved in the index partner. The time of diagnosis varied from 35 to 84
days after the index partner started treatment in these four cases, and
infection is estimated to have occurred no later than 17 days after the index
partner started treatment, underlining the importance of counselling about the
risk of transmission during the first few months of treatment. A separate
poster presentation by Jessica Fogel showed that the cumulative probability of
viral suppression in the index partner was 46.4% after 1 month, 78.5% after 3
months and 89.4% after 6 months, and a longer time to viral suppression was
associated with a higher baseline viral load.
The analysis of viral suppression also looked at treatment
failure in the study. 93 people in the early treatment arm experienced
treatment failure and 9 people in the delayed treatment arm experienced treatment failure.
Professor Cohen noted that even though the results were explained
to all study participants and providers at the time of the study unblinding in
2011, at which time all participants in the deferred treatment arm were offered
antiretroviral treatment, 16% declined to start treatment during the first
year, 7% still declined treatment after the second year, and small handful of
participants – 2% – were still declining treatment at the study’s end.
Professor Cohen said that participants usually explained their reluctance to
start treatment by reference to their CD4 count, and did not see it as an
emergency – a culture of CD4 thresholds which will need to be changed among
both patients and providers, he commented.
Genetic analysis showed that 37% of all infections that
occurred in the study were unlinked; in other words, the source was someone
other than the primary partner enrolled in HPTN 052. In settings with a high
prevalence of HIV, this underlines the fact if the primary relationship is not
exclusive, the uninfected partner remains at high risk if they are having sex
outside this relationship, and the need for combination prevention
interventions at community level which can reduce this risk.
“Antiretroviral treatment is a durable means of preventing
HIV transmission in heterosexual couples,” Professor Cohen told a press
conference, and he told the conference “we see no reason why it should not be
effective” for men who have sex with men, and advised delegates to watch out
for longer-term follow-up from the PARTNER
study, which reported no transmissions between men where the HIV-positive
partner had fully suppressed viral load in an interim analysis released in
2014.