1 / 16

Evaluating the Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions on Transmission Risks

This symposium led by Dr. Thomas Fleming from the University of Washington discusses the crucial criteria influencing the potential impact of HIV prevention interventions. Key metrics examined include the percentage of HIV transmission risks addressed, the size and incidence of risk groups, and the attributable risks of transmission pathways. The presentation highlights hypothetical examples in substance use among MSM populations, demonstrating the need for feasible coverage and understanding of risk reduction outcomes. Practicality, affordability, and acceptability are highlighted as vital to achieving effective interventions.

meghan-calderon
Télécharger la présentation

Evaluating the Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions on Transmission Risks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. VIDI SYMPOSIUM Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions January 14, 2008 Thomas Fleming, PhD University of Washington Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

  2. Percent of HIV transmission risk being addressed ~Size of the risk group: fraction of the incidence ~Attributable risk of transmission pathway addressed ~Potential for reduction in secondary transmission Intervention: Plausible Reduction in Relative Risk ~ Strength of “proof of concept” data ~ Likelihood for effect on secondary transmission 3. Feasible level of coverage of the target population ~ Affordability, Acceptability, Practicality Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  3. ~27% : Black/Hispanic MSM ~16% : Black/Hispanic Non-MSM → 7% heterosexual ; 9% IDU ~24% : White MSM ~ 3% : White Non-MSM Men → 1% heterosexual ; 2% IDU ~ 19% : Black/Hispanic Women (Heterosexual) ~ 5% : Black/Hispanic Women (Non-Heterosex) → IDU ~ 4% : White Women (Heterosexual) ~ 2% : White Women (Non-Heterosexual) Size of the Risk Groups Fraction of the US Incidence

  4. Percent of HIV transmission risk being addressed ~Size of the risk group: fraction of the incidence ~Attributable risk of transmission pathway addressed ~Potential for reduction in secondary transmission Intervention: Plausible Reduction in Relative Risk ~ Strength of “proof of concept” data ~ Likelihood for effect on secondary transmission 3. Feasible level of coverage of the target population ~ Affordability, Acceptability, Practicality Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  5. Hypothetical Example↓ in Substance Use in MSM 1. % of Tx risk addressed 11.25K (25% US incidence) ~Size of risk group ~ 22.5K MSM ~Attributable risk ~ 50% of MSM Tx ~ ↓ in secondary tx ( + ) Plausible ↓ in RR 4.5K (10% US incidence) ~ Established POC? ~ Expect 40% ↓ in risk ~ ↓ in secondary tx ( ─ ) 3. Feasible coverage 2.25K (5% US Incidence) ~ Practical, Affordable? ~ Expect 50% coverage Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  6. Percent of HIV transmission risk being addressed ~Size of the risk group: fraction of the incidence ~Attributable risk of transmission pathway addressed ~Potential for reduction in secondary transmission Intervention: Plausible Reduction in Relative Risk ~ Strength of “proof of concept” data ~ Likelihood for effect on secondary transmission 3. Feasible level of coverage of the target population ~ Affordability, Acceptability, Practicality Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  7. Hypothetical Example↓ in Substance Use in MSM 1. % of Tx risk addressed 11.25K (25% US incidence) ~Size of risk group ~ 22.5K MSM ~Attributable risk ~ 50% of MSM Tx ~ ↓ in secondary tx ( + ) Plausible ↓ in RR 4.5K (10% US incidence) ~ Established POC? ~Expect 40% ↓ in risk ~ ↓ in secondary tx ( ─ ) 3.Feasible coverage 2.25K (5% US Incidence) ~ Practical, Affordable? ~ Expect 50% coverage Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  8. Percent of HIV transmission risk being addressed ~Size of the risk group: fraction of the incidence ~Attributable risk of transmission pathway addressed ~Potential for reduction in secondary transmission Intervention: Plausible Reduction in Relative Risk ~ Strength of “proof of concept” data ~ Likelihood for effect on secondary transmission 3. Feasible level of coverage of the target population ~ Affordability, Acceptability, Practicality Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  9. Hypothetical Example↓ in Substance Use in MSM 1. % of Tx risk addressed 11.25K (25% US incidence) ~Size of risk group ~ 22.5K MSM ~Attributable risk ~ 50% of MSM Tx ~ ↓ in secondary tx ( + ) Plausible ↓ in RR 4.5K (10% US incidence) ~ Established POC? ~Expect 40% ↓ in risk ~ ↓ in secondary tx ( ─ ) 3. Feasible coverage 2.25K (5% US Incidence) ~ Practical, Affordable? ~Expect 50% coverage Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  10. Percent of HIV transmission risk being addressed ~Size of the risk group: fraction of the incidence ~Attributable risk of transmission pathway addressed ~Potential for reduction in secondary transmission Intervention: Plausible Reduction in Relative Risk ~ Strength of “proof of concept” data ~ Likelihood for effect on secondary transmission 3. Feasible level of coverage of the target population ~ Affordability, Acceptability, Practicality Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  11. Hypothetical Example↓ in Substance Use in MSM 1. % of Tx risk addressed 11.25K (25% US incidence) ~Size of risk group ~ 22.5K MSM ~Attributable risk ~ 50% of MSM Tx ~↓ in secondary tx ( + ) Plausible ↓ in RR 4.5K (10% US incidence) ~ Established POC? ~Expect 40% ↓ in risk ~ ↓ in secondary tx ( ─ ) 3. Feasible coverage 2.25K (5% US Incidence) ~ Practical, Affordable? ~Expect 50% coverage Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  12. IllustrationsVaccineMCTART 012, 046 052, 060 , Voice 1. % of Tx risk addressed ~Size of risk group ++ + + ~Attributable risk ++ ++ ++ ~↓ in secondary tx (+/─) ( ─ ) (+/─) Efficacy of intervention ~ Established POC? ?++ ? ~ ↓ in secondary tx ( ? ) ( ─ ) ( ? ) 3. Feasible coverage ~ Practical, Affordable? + +/─ + Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  13. ~27% : Black/Hispanic MSM ~16% : Black/Hispanic Non-MSM → 7% heterosexual ; 9% IDU ~24% : White MSM ~ 3% : White Non-MSM Men → 1% heterosexual ; 2% IDU ~ 19% : Black/Hispanic Women: Heterosexual ~ 5% : Black/Hispanic Women: IDU ~ 4% : White Women: Heterosexual ~ 2% : White Women: IDU Size of the Risk Groups Fraction of the US Incidence

  14. Percent of HIV transmission risk being addressed ~Size of the risk group: fraction of the incidence ~Attributable risk of transmission pathway addressed ~Potential for reduction in secondary transmission Intervention: Plausible Reduction in Relative Risk ~ Strength of “proof of concept” data ~ Likelihood for effect on secondary transmission 3. Feasible level of coverage of the target population ~ Affordability, Acceptability, Practicality Criteria Influencing Potential Impact of HIV Prevention Interventions

  15. VIDI SYMPOSIUM The Way Forward for HIV Prevention: Combination Strategies (HAARP) Domestic & International Vaccines Microbicides ART MCT STD IDU Behavioral

More Related