Background

Our medical center laboratory recently adapted its 24/7, two-hourly testing program to use an ARCHITECT-Multispot-viral load (AR-MS-VL) algorithm in place of a previous rapid test-immunofluorescence (RT-IF) algorithm.

Objectives

We evaluated screening test performance, acute case detection, turnaround time and ability to resolve HIV status under the new algorithm.

Study design

We considered consecutive HIV tests from January to November 2015. AR-MS-VL results at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center (ZSFG) were compared with RT-IF results at ZSFG and also with AR-MS-VL results in the recently completed CDC Screening Targeted Populations to Interrupt On-going Chains of HIV Transmission with Enhanced Partner Notification (STOP) Study for targeted testing of MSM at publicly funded testing sites in San Francisco.

Results

Among 21,985 HIV tests performed at ZSFG, 16,467 were tested by RT-IF and 5518 by AR-MS-VL. There were 321 HIV infections detected, of which 274 (84%) were known HIV+ cases, and 47 were newly identified HIV infections. Considering only patients of HIV-negative or -unknown status, prevalence was 0.22%. Under the AR-MS-VL algorithm, turnaround times for screening results and full algorithm results were 3 and 21h; status-unresolved cases were reduced (from 47% to 22%) compared with the RT-IF algorithm. The positive predictive value (PPV) of a new-positive AR screening test was low (0.44) at ZSFG, where no acute infections were detected. At STOP Study sites where HIV prevalence was higher and acute infection was more common, the AR PPV was higher (0.93). All 24 false-positive AR screening tests at ZSFG had a signal/cutoff (S/CO) ratio of <15 and all 88 true-positive tests had S/CO ratio >15. Of 62 acute infections in the STOP Study, 23 (37%) had an S/CO<15.

Discussion

An AR-MS-VL algorithm is feasible and can return rapid results in a large medical center. In this setting, reactive 4th generation assay tests that are negative for HIV antibodies are typically false-positive with low S/CO ratios.

Background

Retesting for HIV is critical to identifying newly-infected persons and reinforcing prevention efforts among at-risk adults. Incentives can increase one-time HIV testing, but their role in promoting retesting is unknown. We sought to test feasibility and acceptability of incentive strategies, including commitment contracts, to promote HIV retesting among at-risk adults in rural Uganda.

Methods

At-risk HIV-negative adults were enrolled in a pilot trial assessing feasibility and acceptability of incentive strategies to promote HIV retesting three months after enrollment. Participants were randomized (1:1:3) to: 1) no incentive; 2) standard cash incentive (~US$4); and 3) commitment contract: participants could voluntarily make a low- or high-value deposit that would be returned with added interest (totaling ~US$4 including the deposit) upon retesting or lost if participants failed to retest. Contracts sought to promote retesting by leveraging loss aversion and addressing present bias via pre-commitment. Outcomes included acceptability of trial enrollment, contract feasibility (proportion of participants making deposits), and HIV retesting uptake.

Results

Of 130 HIV-negative eligible adults, 123 (95%) enrolled and were randomized: 74 (60%) to commitment contracts, 25 (20%) to standard incentives, and 24 (20%) to no incentive. Of contract participants, 69 (93%) made deposits. Overall, 93 (76%) participants retested for HIV: uptake was highest in the standard incentive group (22/25 [88%]) and lowest in high-value contract (26/36 [72%]) and no incentive (17/24 [71%]) groups.

Conclusion

In a randomized trial of strategies to promote HIV retesting among at-risk adults in Uganda, incentive strategies, including commitment contracts, were feasible and had high acceptability. Our findings suggest use of incentives for HIV retesting merits further comparison in a larger trial.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT:02890459.