Dataset Information

Evidence for optimal HIV screening and testing intervals in HIV-negative individuals from various risk groups: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Background:Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing plays a crucial role in Canada's HIV prevention and treatment efforts and is the first step to achieving the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) 90-90-90 targets; however, how often Canadians, including populations at increased risk of HIV exposure, should be tested is unclear. We conducted a systematic literature review to determine the optimal HIV screening and testing intervals. Objective:To examine the current evidence on HIV testing intervals in HIV-negative individuals from various risk groups and to assess the potential harms and patients' values and preferences associated with different testing frequencies. Methods:We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, the Cochrane Library, PsychINFO and EconLit for studies on different frequencies of HIV testing published between January 2000 and September 2016. An additional search was conducted for grey literature published between January 2000 and October 2016. Data extraction included study characteristics, participants, exposure, outcomes and economic variables. The quality of the studies was assessed and results summarized. Results:Of the 2,702 articles identified from the searches, 27 met the inclusion criteria for review. This included assessments of HIV testing intervals among the general population, men who have sex with men, people who use injection drugs and sex workers. Optimal testing intervals across risk groups ranged from one-time testing to every three months. Data from modelling studies may not be representative of the Canadian context. Few studies identified potential harms of increased screening, specifically an increase in both false positive and false negative results. There were only two studies that addressed patient values and preferences concerning HIV screening, which suggested that the majority of participants were amenable to routine screening through their primary care provider. Conclusion:There was insufficient evidence to support optimal HIV screening and testing intervals for different populations. Context-specific factors, such as budget allocation, human resources, local epidemiology, socioeconomic factors and risk behaviours, along with clinical judgement, inform whom and how often to screen, suggesting the need for research specific to Canada. Research on patient preferences as well as the benefits and harms of more frequent screening are also indicated.

SUBMITTER: Timmerman K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6707414 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evidence for optimal HIV screening and testing intervals in HIV-negative individuals from various risk groups: A systematic review.

Timmerman K K Weekes M M Traversy G G Prabakhar P P Austin T T Ha S S Anwar B B

Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada 20181206 12

<h4>Background</h4>Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing plays a crucial role in Canada's HIV prevention and treatment efforts and is the first step to achieving the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) 90-90-90 targets; however, how often Canadians, including populations at increased risk of HIV exposure, should be tested is unclear. We conducted a systematic literature review to determine the optimal HIV screening and testing intervals.<h4>Objective</h4>To examine the curre ...[more]

PMID: 31517954

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThere are different clinical practices regarding ultrasonography screening intervals for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) despite recommendations from international guidelines.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether ultrasonography screening using intervals suggested by international guidelines is associated with cancer stage shifting, reductions in mortality, and improved quality of life (QoL) for patients with HCC.Design, setting, and participantsThis nationwide comparative effectiveness research study estimated lifetime survival functions using interlinkages of 3 databases from Taiwan-the Taiwan National Health Insurance, Taiwan National Cancer Registry, and National Mortality Registry-combined with QoL measurements obtained from National Cheng Kung University Hospital. In total, 114 022 patients listed as having newly diagnosed HCC from 2002 through 2015 in the Taiwan National Cancer Registry were followed up until 2017. The QoL values of 1059 patients with HCC who visited National Cheng Kung University Hospital were prospectively measured with the European QoL-5 dimensions questionnaire from 2011 through 2019. Patients were categorized based on the time between their last ultrasonography screening and the index date (90 days prior to HCC diagnosis) as 1 of 5 subcohorts: 6 months (0-6 months), 12 months (7-12 months), 24 months (13-24 months), 36 months (25-36 months), and longer than 36 months (no screening in the previous 3 years). Data were analyzed from April 2020 to April 2021.Main outcomes and measuresLife expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy, and loss of life expectancy or loss of quality-adjusted life expectancy compared with age-, sex-, and calendar year-matched cohorts.ResultsThere were 59 194 patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging information, including 42 081 men (mean [SD] age, 62.2 [12.6] years) and 17 113 women (mean [SD] age, 69.0 [11.2] years). There was a consistent trend showing that the longer the interval between ultrasonography examinations, the higher the loss of life expectancy and loss of quality-adjusted life expectancy for both sexes. Loss of quality-adjusted life expectancy values for male subcohorts were 10.0 (95% CI, 9.1-10.9) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for ultrasonography screening intervals of 6 months, 11.1 (95% CI, 10.4-11.8) QALYs for 12 months, 12.1 (95% CI, 11.5-12.7) QALYs for 24 months, 13.1 (95% CI, 12.6-13.6) QALYs for 36 months, and 14.6 (95% CI, 14.2-15.0) QALYs for longer than 36 months. Loss of quality-adjusted life expectancy values for female subcohorts were 9.0 (95% CI, 8.3-9.6) QALYs for 6 months, 9.7 (95% CI, 9.2-10.2) QALYs for 12 months, 10.3 (95% CI, 9.8-10.7) QALYs for 24 months, 10.7 (95% CI, 10.2-11.1) QALYs for 36 months, and 11.4 (95% CI, 11.0-11.8) QALYs for longer than 36 months. Patients with underlying hepatitis B virus infection or cirrhosis had the greatest improvement in life expectancy with shorter screening intervals.Conclusions and relevanceRegular ultrasonography screening with intervals less than 6 to 12 months may be associated with early detection of HCC, save lives, and improve the quality of life for patients with HCC from a lifetime perspective.

Project description:ObjectivesTo provide updated evidence about the risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher (CIN3+) and cervical cancer after a negative human papillomavirus (HPV) test in primary cervical screening, by age group and test assay.DesignObservational study.SettingReal world data from the English HPV screening pilot's first and second rounds (2013-16, follow-up to end of 2019).Participants1 341 584 women.InterventionsCervical screening with HPV testing or liquid based cytological testing (cytology or smear tests). Women screened with cytology were referred to colposcopy after high grade cytological abnormalities or after borderline or low grade abnormalities combined with a positive HPV triage test. Women screened with HPV testing who were positive were referred at baseline if their cytology triage test showed at least borderline abnormalities or after a retest (early recall) at 12 and 24 months if they had persistent abnormalities.Main outcome measuresDetection of CIN3+ and cervical cancer after a negative HPV test.ResultsFor women younger than 50 years, second round detection of CIN3+ in this study was significantly lower after a negative HPV screen in the first round than after cytology testing (1.21/1000 v 4.52/1000 women screened, adjusted odds ratio 0.26, 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 0.30), as was the risk of interval cervical cancer (1.31/100 000 v 2.90/100 000 woman years, adjusted hazard ratio 0.44, 0.23 to 0.84). Risk of an incident CIN3+ detected at the second screening round in the pilot five years after a negative HPV test was even lower in women older than 50 years, than in three years in women younger than 50 years (0.57/1000 v 1.21/1000 women screened, adjusted odds ratio 0.46, 0.27 to 0.79). Women with negative HPV tests at early recall after a positive HPV screening test without cytological abnormalities had a higher detection rate of CIN3+ at the second routine recall than women who initially tested HPV negative (5.39/1000 v 1.21/1000 women screened, adjusted odds ratio 3.27, 95% confidence interval 2.21 to 4.84). Detection after a negative result on a clinically validated APTIMA mRNA HPV test was similar to that after clinically validated cobas and RealTime DNA tests (for CIN3+ at the second round 1.32/1000 v 1.14/1000 women screened, adjusted odds ratio 1.05, 0.73 to 1.50).ConclusionsThese data support an extension of the screening intervals, regardless of the test assay used: to five years after a negative HPV test in women aged 25-49 years, and even longer for women aged 50 years and older. The screening interval for HPV positive women who have negative HPV tests at early recall should be kept at three years.

Project description:IntroductionShort interpregnancy interval (IPI) has been linked to adverse pregnancy outcomes. WHO recommends waiting at least 2 years after a live birth and 6 months after miscarriage or induced termination before conception of another pregnancy. The evidence underpinning these recommendations largely relies on data from low/middle-income countries. Furthermore, recent epidemiological investigations have suggested that these studies may overestimate the effects of IPI due to residual confounding. Future investigations of IPI effects in high-income countries drawing from large, population-based data sources are needed to inform IPI recommendations. We aim to assess the impact of IPIs on maternal and child health outcomes in high-income countries.Methods and analysisThis international longitudinal retrospective cohort study will include more than 18 million pregnancies, making it the largest study to investigate IPI in high-income countries. Population-based data from Australia, Finland, Norway and USA will be used. Birth records in each country will be used to identify consecutive pregnancies. Exact dates of birth and clinical best estimates of gestational length will be used to estimate IPI. Administrative birth and health data sources with >99% coverage in each country will be used to identify maternal sociodemographics, pregnancy complications, details of labour and delivery, birth and child health information. We will use matched and unmatched regression models to investigate the impact of IPI on maternal and infant outcomes, and conduct meta-analysis to pool results across countries.Ethics and disseminationEthics boards at participating sites approved this research (approval was not required in Finland). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences, and will inform recommendations for optimal IPI in high-income countries. Findings will provide important information for women and families planning future pregnancies and for clinicians providing prenatal care and giving guidance on family planning.

Dataset Information

Evidence for optimal HIV screening and testing intervals in HIV-negative individuals from various risk groups: A systematic review.

Publications

Evidence for optimal HIV screening and testing intervals in HIV-negative individuals from various risk groups: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets