Population-based HIV Impact Assessments (PHIAs) are national household (HH) surveys that provide HIV diagnosis and CD4 testing with an immediate return of results. Accurate CD4 results improve HIV-positive participants' clinical care and inform the effectiveness of HIV programs. Here, we present CD4 results from the PHIA surveys that were conducted in 11 countries in sub-Saharan Africa between 2015 and 2018. All of the HIV-positive participants and 2 to 5% of the HIV-negative participants were offered Pima CD4 (Abbott, IL, USA) point-of-care (POC) tests. The quality of the CD4 test was ensured by conducting instrument verification, comprehensive training, quality control, a review of testing errors and an analysis of unweighted CD4 data by HIV status, age, gender, and antiretroviral (ARV) treatment status. Overall, CD4 testing was completed for 23,085 (99.5%) of the 23,209 HIV-positive and 7,329 (2.7%) of the 270,741 negative participants in 11 surveys. The instrument error rate was 11.3% (range, 4.4% to 15.7%). The median CD4 values among HIV-positive and HIV-negative participants (aged 15+) were 468 cells/mm(3) (interquartile range [IQR], 307 to 654) and 811 cells/mm(3) (IQR, 647 to 1,013), respectively (P < 0.0001). Among the HIV-positive participants (aged 15+), those with detectable ARVs had higher CD4 values (508 cells/mm(3)) than those with undetectable ARVs (385.5 cells/mm(3)). Among the HIV-positive participants (aged 15+), 11.4% (2,528/22,253) had a CD4 value of less than 200 cells/mm(3), and approximately half of them (1,225/2,528 = 48.5%) had detectable ARVs, whereas 51.5% (1,303/2,528) had no detectable ARVs. We successfully implemented high quality POC CD4 testing using Pima instruments. Our data come from nationally representative surveys in 11 countries and provide unique insights regarding the CD4 distribution among HIV-positive individuals as well as the baseline CD4 values among HIV-negative individuals. IMPORTANCE The manuscript describes CD4 levels among HIV-positive individuals and baseline CD4 levels among HIV-negative individuals from 11 sub-Saharan countries, thereby highlighting the importance of CD4 markers in the context of the HIV epidemic. Despite increased ARV access in each country, advanced HIV disease (CD4 < 200 cells/mm(3)) persists among approximately 11% of HIV-positive individuals. Therefore, it is important that our findings are shared with the scientific community to assist with similar implementations of point-of-care testing and to conduct a review of HIV programmatic gaps.

Background: The Nigeria AIDS Indicator and Impact Survey (NAIIS), a cross-sectional household survey, was conducted in 2018 with primary objectives to estimate HIV prevalence, HIV-1 incidence, and status of UNAIDS 90-90-90 cascade. We conducted retrospective analysis of the performance of HIV rapid tests and the national HIV testing algorithm used in Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: Conducting HIV surveys in resource-limited settings is challenging because of logistics, limited availability of trained personnel, and complexity of testing. We described the procedures and systems deemed critical to ensure high-quality laboratory data in the population-based HIV impact assessments and large-scale household surveys. METHODS: Laboratory professionals were engaged in every stage of the surveys, including protocol development, site assessments, procurement, training, quality assurance, monitoring, analysis, and reporting writing. A tiered network of household, satellite laboratories, and central laboratories, accompanied with trainings, optimized process for blood specimen collection, storage, transport, and real-time monitoring of specimen quality, and test results at each level proved critical in maintaining specimen integrity and high-quality testing. A plausibility review of aggregate merged data was conducted to confirm associations between key variables as a final quality check for quality of laboratory results. RESULTS: Overall, we conducted a hands-on training for 3355 survey staff across 13 surveys, with 160-387 personnel trained per survey on biomarker processes. Extensive training and monitoring demonstrated that overall, 99% of specimens had adequate volume and 99.8% had no hemolysis, indicating high quality. We implemented quality control and proficiency testing for testing, resolved discrepancies, verified >300 Pima CD4 instruments, and monitored user errors. Aggregate data review for plausibility further confirmed the high quality of testing. CONCLUSIONS: Ongoing engagement of laboratory personnel to oversee processes at all levels of the surveys is critical for successful national surveys. High-quality population-based HIV impact assessments laboratory data ensured reliable results and demonstrated the impact of HIV programs in 13 countries.

BACKGROUND: Artemisinin-resistant Plasmodium falciparum has emerged in the Greater Mekong sub-region and poses a major global public health threat. Slow parasite clearance is a key clinical manifestation of reduced susceptibility to artemisinin. This study was designed to establish the baseline values for clearance in patients from Sub-Saharan African countries with uncomplicated malaria treated with artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs). METHODS: A literature review in PubMed was conducted in March 2013 to identify all prospective clinical trials (uncontrolled trials, controlled trials and randomized controlled trials), including ACTs conducted in Sub-Saharan Africa, between 1960 and 2012. Individual patient data from these studies were shared with the WorldWide Antimalarial Resistance Network (WWARN) and pooled using an a priori statistical analytical plan. Factors affecting early parasitological response were investigated using logistic regression with study sites fitted as a random effect. The risk of bias in included studies was evaluated based on study design, methodology and missing data. RESULTS: In total, 29,493 patients from 84 clinical trials were included in the analysis, treated with artemether-lumefantrine (n = 13,664), artesunate-amodiaquine (n = 11,337) and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (n = 4,492). The overall parasite clearance rate was rapid. The parasite positivity rate (PPR) decreased from 59.7 % (95 % CI: 54.5-64.9) on day 1 to 6.7 % (95 % CI: 4.8-8.7) on day 2 and 0.9 % (95 % CI: 0.5-1.2) on day 3. The 95th percentile of observed day 3 PPR was 5.3 %. Independent risk factors predictive of day 3 positivity were: high baseline parasitaemia (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 1.16 (95 % CI: 1.08-1.25); per 2-fold increase in parasite density, P <0.001); fever (>37.5 degreeC) (AOR = 1.50 (95 % CI: 1.06-2.13), P = 0.022); severe anaemia (AOR = 2.04 (95 % CI: 1.21-3.44), P = 0.008); areas of low/moderate transmission setting (AOR = 2.71 (95 % CI: 1.38-5.36), P = 0.004); and treatment with the loose formulation of artesunate-amodiaquine (AOR = 2.27 (95 % CI: 1.14-4.51), P = 0.020, compared to dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine). CONCLUSIONS: The three ACTs assessed in this analysis continue to achieve rapid early parasitological clearance across the sites assessed in Sub-Saharan Africa. A threshold of 5 % day 3 parasite positivity from a minimum sample size of 50 patients provides a more sensitive benchmark in Sub-Saharan Africa compared to the current recommended threshold of 10 % to trigger further investigation of artemisinin susceptibility.