Background Given the potentially causal association of female genital schistosomiasis (FGS) with HIV-1 infection, improved diagnostics are urgently needed to scale-up FGS surveillance. The BIL-HIV (bilharzia and HIV) study assessed the performance of home-based self-collection methods (cervical and vaginal swabs) compared to cervicovaginal lavage (CVL) for the detection of Schistosoma DNA by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Methods Between January and August 2018, a consecutive series of female participants from the Population-Cohort of the previous HIV prevention trial HPTN 071 (PopART), resident in Livingstone, Zambia were invited to take part in BILHIV if they were 18-31 years old, non-pregnant and sexually active. Genital self-collected swabs and a urine specimen were obtained and a questionnaire completed at home visits. CVL was obtained at clinic follow-up. Results 603 women self-collected genital swabs. Of these, 527 women had CVL performed by a midwife during clinic follow-up. Schistosoma DNA was more frequently detected in genital self-collected specimens (24/603, 4.0%) compared to CVL (14/527, 2.7%). Overall, 5.0% (30/603) women had female genital schistosomiasis, defined as a positive PCR by any genital sampling method

SummaryBackgroundThe HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster-randomised trial provided door-to-door HIV testing services to a large proportion of individuals residing in 21 intervention communities in Zambia and South Africa from 2014 to 2017 and reached the UNAIDS first 90 target among women in Zambia, yet gaps remained among men and young adults. This cluster-randomised study nested in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial sought to increase knowledge of HIV status across all groups by offering the choice of oral HIV self-testing in addition to routine door-to-door HIV testing services.MethodsWe nested this cluster-randomised trial in four HTPN 071 (PopART) intervention communities in northern Zambia. 66 zones (clusters) in these communities were randomly allocated (1:1) to either oral HIV self-testing plus routine door-to-door HIV testing services (HIV self-testing group) or the PopART standard of care of door-to-door HIV testing services alone (non- HIV self-testing group) over a 3-month period. All individuals aged 16 years or older were eligible for HIV testing. Randomisation was achieved by randomly selecting one allocation from a list of 10 000 possible allocations during a public ceremony. In HIV self-testing zones, trained lay-counsellors (known as community HIV care providers) visited households and offered eligible individuals the choice of HIV testing using HIV self-testing or routine door-to-door HIV testing services. For individuals aged 18 years or older whose partner was absent during the household visit, an HIV self-test kit could be left for secondary distribution to the absent partner. The primary outcome was knowledge of HIV status (defined as self-reporting HIV positive to the community HIV care providers or accepting an offer of HIV testing services). Outcomes were measured among households that were first visited, and individuals first enumerated as a household member during the HIV self-testing intervention period. We analysed data at the individual level using population-average logistic regression models, accounting for clustering of outcomes by zone, to estimate the effect of the intervention. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02994329.FindingsBetween Feb 1, and April 30, 2017, the community HIV care providers enumerated 13 267 eligible individuals in the HIV self-testing group and 13 706 in the non-HIV self-testing group. After intervention implementation, 9027 (68%) of 13 267 in the HIV self-testing group had knowledge of HIV status compared with 8952 (65%) of 13 706 in the non-HIV self-testing group (adjusted odds ratio 1·30, 95% CI 1·03–1·65; p=0·03). The effect differed by sex (pinteraction=0·01). Among men, knowledge of HIV status was higher in the HIV self-testing group than in the non-HIV self-testing group (3843 [60%] of 6368 vs 3571 [55%] of 6486; adjusted odds ratio 1·31, 95% CI 1·07–1·60; p=0·01). There was no evidence of a between-group difference among female participants.InterpretationProviding a choice of HIV self-testing during delivery of door-to-door HIV testing ser...

Introduction: Population-wide HIV testing services (HTS) must be delivered in order to achieve universal antiretroviral treatment (ART) coverage. To accurately deliver HTS at such scale, non-facility-based HIV point-of-care testing (HIV-POCT) is necessary but requires rigorous quality assurance (QA). This study assessed the performance of community-wide HTS in Zambia and South Africa (SA) as part of the HPTN 071 (PopART) study and explores the impact of quality improvement interventions on HTS performance. Methods: Between 2014 and 2016, HIV-POCT was undertaken within households both as part of the randomly selected HPTN 071 research cohort (Population Cohort [PC]) and as part of the intervention provided by community HIV-care providers. HIV-POCT followed national algorithms in both countries. Consenting PC participants provided a venous blood sample in addition to being offered HIV-POCT. We compared results obtained in the PC using a laboratory-based gold standard (GS) testing algorithm and HIV-POCT. Comprehensive QA mechanisms were put in place to support the community-wide testing. Participants who were identified as having a false negative or false positive HIV rapid test were revisited and offered retesting. Results: We initially observed poor sensitivity (45–54%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 31–69) of HIV-POCT in the PC in SA compared to sensitivity in Zambia for the same time period of 95.8% (95% CI 93–98). In both countries, specificity of HIV-POCT was >98%. With enhanced QA interventions and adoption of the same HIV-POCT algorithm, sensitivity in SA improved to a similar level as in Zambia. Conclusions: This is one of the first reports of HIV-POCT performance during wide-scale delivery of HTS compared to a GS laboratory algorithm. HIV-POCT in a real-world setting had a lower sensitivity than anticipated. Appropriate choice of HIV-POCT algorithms, intensive training and supervision, and robust QA mechanisms are necessary to optimize HIV-POCT test performance when testing is delivered at a community level. HIV-POCT in clients who did not disclose that they were on ART may have contributed to false negative HIV-POCT results and should be the topic of future research.