HIV: almost gone, but still forgotten.
The Australian response to the emergence of human immunodeficiency virus and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) has been rightly praised as being progressive for its time but also highly effective in preventing the virus from becoming established in the general population.1, 2 One of the factors identified for this success was the engagement of the community sector – activists, lobby groups and associations rather than a purely medically driven disease control model. In 2016, a joint statement3 from the Australian Federation of AIDS Organisations (AFAO) and researchers from the Peter Doherty and Kirby Institutes declared ‘the end of AIDS as a public health issue in Australia’; however, it is important to consider what this means. Certainly, HIV is now considered primarily an outpatient disease, and deaths from AIDS-related complications are so rare that the decision no longer to collect data on them is justifiable. However, in 2017 there were more than 27 500 people living with HIV and 963 persons newly diagnosed in Australia.4 The number of new diagnoses has been trending down since the peak in 2014; however, the overall statistic conceals many concerning trends. The proportion of diagnoses where male-to-male sex is identified as the primary risk factor is declining, also since 2014, while heterosexual exposure has increased in turn. This increase has been most marked in patients not reporting another high-risk marker (e.g. sexual contact with a partner at high-risk, or being from a high-prevalence country). The proportion of patients diagnosed with CD4 counts of <350 × 106 cells/L has increased from 28.5% to 35.9%, and <200 × 106 cells/L (i.e. those with late-stage disease) from 16.7% to 22.5% across the same period. Some of this change likely represents the successful implementation of new biomedical prevention methods – the increasing recognition of the success of ‘Treatment as Prevention’ (TasP) and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP), which have targeted individuals at highest risk of HIV infection – men who have sex with men, and particularly highly sexually adventurous men. Australia has also been progressive in its approach to biomedical prevention, with PrEP now available on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme for persons at risk of incident HIV infection.5 Around 200 people are diagnosed with advanced HIV in Australia each year. Factors associated with late diagnosis in studies outside Australia include being from a marginalised population (including misuse of drugs or alcohol), older age,6 heterosexual acquisition7 and fear of stigma.8 Many of the reviews of late diagnoses find multiple missed opportunities for testing prior to the positive test – potentially allowing treatment when immune status was still relatively normal. Two papers in this issue of the Internal Medicine Journal address the issue of HIV testing in other diseases that, while not AIDS-defining, may be associated with HIV infection.9, 10 Lin and colleagues9 review Australian specialty guidelines for these indicator conditions and find room for improvement in the recommendations around HIV testing. The second paper by King and colleagues10 finds that a simple educational intervention is effective at increasing the rate of HIV testing in a general medical unit, but that rates of testing are still far too low, and calls for new strategies to boost these low testing rates. Opt-out universal HIV screening has been shown to increase the number of diagnosed individuals in both low-risk11 and high-risk12 settings; however, questions about cost-effectiveness and the ethics of universal testing in Australia remain. Critical to improving the rate of testing is normalising HIV screening for patients and for clinicians. For indicator conditions, this can be as simple as saying ‘when we see this condition, we routinely screen for HIV because it can be associated with your condition. Have you ever been tested? Do you think you could be at risk?’. The previous procedure for documenting formal informed consent and pre- and post-test counselling is no longer necessary for Medicare reimbursement of testing, but the perception of the complex counselling requirements around HIV testing persists. Treatment and prognosis for HIV have progressed so far since the 1980s that there is no longer any medical reason to treat HIV testing differently to any of the other tests routinely done every day. However, the other major barrier to HIV screening is stigma about the disease and fear. We may be reluctant to suggest screening patients who we do not identify as being high-risk because of fear of offending them, or concern that the patient will receive the wrong message. Of course, these fears and attitudes are themselves the result of stigma; those living in the mid-80s will no doubt remember newspaper headlines about the ‘Gay Plague’ or the Federal Government's Grim Reaper advertisements. Treating HIV as something that ‘other people’ get only reinforces stigma and contributes to people fearing undergoing (or offering) testing and will not help those people who are yet to be diagnosed. Ironically, the groups that are at greatest risk have been the quickest to engage novel testing methods like point-of-care HIV testing, outreach testing13 and even testing at home. To be able to say we have truly reached the end of HIV's time as a public health threat, education is critical, that HIV is now just another chronic disease, and that there is no shame in testing for it or in living with it.
Read more