Projecting the Potential Clinical and Economic Impact of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Prevention Resource Reallocation in Tennessee

Ethan D Borre,Aima A Ahonkhai,Kyu-young Kevin Chi,Amna Osman,Krista Thayer,Anna K Person,Andrea Weddle,Clare F Flanagan,April C Pettit,David Closs,Mia Cotton,Allison L Agwu,Michelle S Cespedes,Andrea L Ciaranello,Gregg Gonsalves,Emily P Hyle,A David Paltiel,Kenneth A Freedberg,Anne M Neilan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae243
IF: 20.999
2024-06-25
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Abstract:Background In 2023, Tennessee replaced $6.2 M in US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention funding with state funds to redirect support away from men who have sex with men (MSM), transgender women (TGW), and heterosexual Black women (HSBW) and to prioritize instead first responders (FR), pregnant people (PP), and survivors of sex trafficking (SST). Methods We used a simulation model of HIV disease to compare the clinical impact of Current, the present allocation of condoms, preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP), and HIV testing to CDC priority risk groups (MSM/TGW/HSBW); with Reallocation, funding instead increased HIV testing and linkage of Tennessee-determined priority populations (FR/PP/SST). Key model inputs included baseline condom use (45%–49%), PrEP provision (0.1%–8%), HIV testing frequency (every 2.5–4.8 years), and 30-day HIV care linkage (57%–65%). We assumed Reallocation would reduce condom use (−4%), PrEP provision (−26%), and HIV testing (−47%) in MSM/TGW/HSBW, whereas it would increase HIV testing among FR (+47%) and HIV care linkage (to 100%/90%) among PP/SST. Results Reallocation would lead to 166 additional HIV transmissions, 190 additional deaths, and 843 life-years lost over 10 years. HIV testing reductions were most influential in sensitivity analysis; even a 24% reduction would result in 287 more deaths compared to Current. With pessimistic assumptions, we projected 1359 additional HIV transmissions, 712 additional deaths, and 2778 life-years lost over 10 years. Conclusions Redirecting HIV prevention funding in Tennessee would greatly harm CDC priority populations while conferring minimal benefits to new priority populations.
immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to evaluate the clinical and economic impacts of the re - allocation of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention funds in Tennessee. Specifically, the paper explores the impacts on HIV transmission, mortality, and years of life lost after re - allocating HIV prevention resources originally used for priority - at - risk groups such as men who have sex with men (MSM), transgender women (TGW), and heterosexual black women (HSBW) to other groups such as first responders (FR), pregnant women (PP), and sex - trade victims (SST). ### Research Background In 2023, Tennessee replaced the $6.2 million HIV prevention funds provided by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) with state government funds and adjusted the direction of fund allocation, reducing support for MSM, TGW, and HSBW and instead giving priority to supporting FR, PP, and SST. ### Research Methods The study used a simulation model of the HIV disease to compare the clinical impacts in two scenarios: 1. **Current Allocation** (Current): The existing method of fund allocation, mainly supporting the priority - at - risk groups (MSM, TGW, HSBW) identified by the CDC. 2. **Re - allocation** (Reallocation): The funds are increased for HIV testing and linkage to the priority populations (FR, PP, SST) identified in Tennessee. ### Key Model Inputs - Baseline condom use rate (45% - 49%) - PrEP provision rate (0.1% - 8%) - HIV testing frequency (once every 2.5 - 4.8 years) - HIV care linkage rate within 30 days (57% - 65%) ### Results - **Re - allocation** will lead to 166 additional cases of HIV transmission, 190 additional deaths, and 843 years of life lost. - In the sensitivity analysis, the impact of reduced HIV testing is the greatest; even a 24% reduction in testing will lead to 287 more deaths than currently. - Under pessimistic assumptions, there are expected to be 1,359 additional cases of HIV transmission, 712 additional deaths, and 2,778 years of life lost. ### Conclusions The re - allocation of HIV prevention funds in Tennessee will cause great harm to the CDC - priority groups, while the benefits to the new priority groups are limited. ### Key Formulas - **Increase in HIV Transmission**: \[ \Delta T = T_{\text{Reallocation}} - T_{\text{Current}} \] - **Increase in Deaths**: \[ \Delta D = D_{\text{Reallocation}} - D_{\text{Current}} \] - **Years of Life Lost**: \[ \Delta L = L_{\text{Reallocation}} - L_{\text{Current}} \] where \( T \) represents the total number of HIV transmissions, \( D \) represents the total number of deaths, and \( L \) represents the total years of life. Through these formulas, the study quantifies the specific impacts of re - allocating HIV prevention funds on different groups.