Projected Impact of Concurrently Available Long-Acting Injectable and Daily-Oral Human Immunodeficiency Virus Preexposure Prophylaxis: A Mathematical Model.
Kevin M Maloney, Adrien Le Guillou, Robert A Driggers, Supriya Sarkar, Emeli J Anderson, Amyn A Malik, Samuel M Jenness
Author Information
Kevin M Maloney: Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Adrien Le Guillou: Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Robert A Driggers: Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Supriya Sarkar: Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Emeli J Anderson: Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Amyn A Malik: Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Samuel M Jenness: Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable (LAI) human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is reportedly efficacious, although full trial results have not been published. We used a dynamic network model of HIV transmission among men who have sex with men to assess the population impact of LAI-PrEP when available concurrently with daily-oral (DO) PrEP. METHODS: The reference model represents the current HIV epidemiology and DO-PrEP coverage (15% among those with behavioral indications for PrEP) among men who have sex with men in the southeastern United States. Primary analyses investigated varied PrEP uptake and proportion selecting LAI-PrEP. Secondary analyses evaluated uncertainty in pharmacokinetic efficacy and LAI-PrEP persistence relative to DO-PrEP. RESULTS: Compared with the reference scenario, if 50% chose LAI-PrEP, 4.3% (95% simulation interval, -7.3% to 14.5%) of infections would be averted over 10 years. The impact of LAI-PrEP is slightly greater than that of the DO-PrEP-only regimen, based on assumptions of higher adherence and partial protection after discontinuation. If the total PrEP initiation rate doubled, 17.1% (95% simulation interval, 6.7%-26.4%) of infections would be averted. The highest population-level impact occurred when LAI-PrEP uptake and persistence improved. CONCLUSIONS: If LAI-PrEP replaces DO-PrEP, its availability will modestly improve the population impact. LAI-PrEP will make a more substantial impact if its availability drives higher total PrEP coverage, or if persistence is greater for LAI-PrEP.
