Introduction Oral pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been scaled up; however, data from real‐world settings are limited. We studied oral PrEP preference, uptake, adherence and continuation among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) vulnerable to HIV in sub‐Saharan Africa. Methods We conducted a prospective cohort study among 14‐ to 24‐year‐old AGYW without HIV who were followed for 12 months in Kampala, Uganda. Within at least 14 days of enrolment, they received two education sessions, including demonstrations on five biomedical interventions that are; available (oral PrEP), will be available soon (long‐acting injectable PrEP and anti‐retroviral vaginal ring) and in development (PrEP implant and HIV vaccine). Information included mode and frequency of delivery, potential side effects and method availability. Volunteers ranked interventions, 1 = most preferred to 5 = least preferred. Oral PrEP was “preferred” if ranked among the top two choices. All were offered oral PrEP, and determinants of uptake assessed using Poisson regression with robust error variance. Adherence was assessed using plasma tenofovir levels and self‐reports. Results Between January and October 2019, 532 volunteers were screened; 285 enrolled of whom 265 received two education sessions. Mean age was 20 years (SD±2.2), 92.8% reported paid sex, 20.4% reported ≥10 sexual partners in the past 3 months, 38.5% used hormonal contraceptives, 26.9% had chlamydia, gonorrhoea and/or active syphilis. Of 265 volunteers, 47.6% preferred oral PrEP. Willingness to take PrEP was 90.2%; however, uptake was 30.6% ( n = 81). Following enrolment, 51.9% started PrEP on day 14 (same day PrEP offered), 20.9% within 30 days and 27.2% after 30 days. PrEP uptake was associated with more sexual partners in the past 3 months: 2–9 partners (aRR = 2.36, 95% CI: 1.20–4.63) and ≥10 partners (aRR 4.70, 95% CI 2.41–9.17); oral PrEP preference (aRR 1.53, 95% CI 1.08–2.19) and being separated (aRR 1.55, 95% CI 1.04–2.33). Of 100 samples from 49 volunteers during follow up, 19 had quantifiable tenofovir levels (>10 μg/L) of which only three were protective (>40 μg/L). Conclusions Half of AGYW preferred oral PrEP, uptake and adherence were low, uptake was associated with sexual behavioural risk and oral PrEP preference. Development of alternative biomedical products should be expedited to meet end‐user preferences and, community delivery promoted during restricted movement.

Background: Cryptococcal meningitis is a leading cause of meningitis in sub-Saharan Africa. Given the need for rapid point of care testing, we evaluated the diagnostic performance of the Dynamiker cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) lateral flow assay (LFA). Methods: We assessed the diagnostic performance of the Dynamiker CrAg-LFA compared to the IMMY CrAg-LFA as the reference standard. We tested 150 serum, 115 plasma, 100 cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples from HIV patients with symptomatic meningitis and 113 serum samples from patients with suspected asymptomatic cryptococcal antigenemia. Results: Compared to the IMMY CrAg-LFA, sensitivity of Dynamiker CrAg-LFA was 98% in serum, 100% in plasma, 100% in CSF from symptomatic patients and 96% in serum from asymptomatic patients. Specificity was 66% in serum, 61% in plasma, 91% in CSF from symptomatic patients, and 86% in serum from asymptomatic patients. The positive predictive value was 85% in serum, 82% in plasma, 96% in CSF from symptomatic patients, and 69% in serum from asymptomatic patients. The negative predictive value was 94% in serum, 100% in plasma, 100% in CSF from symptomatic patients, and 99% in serum from asymptomatic patients. The inter-assay reproducibility was 100% across the four sample types with no observed discordant results when Dynamiker CrAg-LFA was tested in duplicate. However, a high number of false positives were observed on serum of symptomatic patients (11%), serum of asymptomatic patients (11%) and plasma of symptomatic patients (14%). Conclusion: The Dynamiker CrAg-LFA had excellent sensitivity but poor specificity, particularly when tested on serum and plasma.

Background Substandard anti-malarial agents pose a significant challenge to effective malaria control and elimination efforts especially in sub-Saharan Africa. The quality of anti-malarials in most low-and-middle income countries (LMICs) is affected by several factors including inadequate regulation and limited resources. In this study, the pharmacopeial quality of artemether–lumefantrine (AL) in low and high malaria transmission settings in Uganda was assessed. Methods This was a cross-sectional study conducted among randomly selected private drug outlets. The AL anti-malarials available in drug outlets were purchased using overt method. The samples were screened for quality using visual inspection, weight uniformity, content assay and dissolution tests. The assay test was done using liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS). The samples were considered substandard if the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) content was outside 90–110% range of the label claim. Dissolution test was conducted following United States Pharmacopoeia (USP) method. Data was analysed using descriptive statistics and presented as means with standard deviations, frequencies, and proportions. Correlation between medicine quality and independent variables was determined using Fisher’s exact test of independence at 95% level of significance. Results A total of 74 AL anti-malarial samples were purchased from high (49/74; 66.2%) and low (25/74; 33.8%) malaria transmission settings. The most common batch of AL was LONART, 32.4% (24/74), with 33.8% (25/74) being ‘Green leaf’. Overall prevalence of substandard quality artemether–lumefantrine was 18.9% (14/74; 95% CI: 11.4–29.7). Substandard quality AL was significantly associated with setting (p = 0.002). A total of 10 samples (13.5%) failed artemether content assay test while, 4 samples (5.4%, 4/74) failed the lumefantrine assay test. One sample from a high malaria transmission setting failed both artemether and lumefantrine assay content test. Of the samples that failed artemether assay test, 90% had low (< 90%) artemether content. All the samples passed visual inspection and dissolution tests. Conclusion Artemether–lumefantrine agents, the recommended first-line treatment for uncomplicated malaria with APIs outside the recommended pharmacopeial content assay limit is common especially in high malaria transmission settings. There is need for continuous surveillance and monitoring of the quality of artemisinin-based anti-malarials across the country by the drug regulatory agency.