An HIV-1 risk assessment tool for women aged 15-49 in African countries: A pooled analysis across 15 nationally representative surveys

Nora E Rosenberg,Bonnie E Shook-Sa,Amber M Young,Yating Zou,Lynda Stranix-Chibanda,Marcel Yotebieng,Nadia A Sam-Agudu,Sam J Phiri,Wilbroad Mutale,Linda-Gail Bekker,Manhattan E Charurat,Sizulu Moyo,Khangelani Zuma,Jessica Justman,Michael G Hudgens,Benjamin H Chi
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae211
IF: 20.999
2024-04-25
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Abstract:Background Women in Africa disproportionately acquire HIV-1. Understanding which women are most likely to acquire HIV-1 can guide focused prevention with pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Our objective is to identify women at highest risk of HIV-1 and estimate PrEP efficiency at different sensitivity levels. Methods Nationally representative data were collected from 2015-2019 from 15 population-based household surveys. This analysis included women aged 15-49 who tested HIV-1 sero-negative or had recent HIV-1. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression models were fit with 28 variables to predict recent HIV-1. Models were trained on the full population and internally cross-validated. Performance was evaluated using area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and number needed to treat (NNT) with PrEP to avert one infection. Results Among 209,012 participants 248 had recent HIV-1 infection, representing 118 million women and 402,000 (95% CI: 309,000-495,000) new annual infections. Two variables were retained in the model: living in a subnational area with high HIV-1 viremia and having a sexual partner living outside the home. Full-population AUC was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.76-0.84); cross-validated AUC was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.75-0.84). At a sensitivity of 33%, up to 130,000 cases could be averted if 7.9 million women were perfectly adherent to PrEP; NNT would be 61. At a sensitivity of 67%, up to 260,000 cases could be averted if 25.1 million women were perfectly adherent to PrEP; the NNT would be 96. Conclusions This risk assessment tool was generalizable, predictive, and parsimonious with tradeoffs between reach and efficiency.
immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?