Validating HIV Viral Suppression Threshold Adjustments for Comparable Estimates Using Data From Nationally Representative Household Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Olanrewaju Edun, Lucy Okell, Timothy M Wolock, Eline L Korenromp, Leigh F Johnson, Jeffrey W Imai-Eaton
{"title":"Validating HIV Viral Suppression Threshold Adjustments for Comparable Estimates Using Data From Nationally Representative Household Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa.","authors":"Olanrewaju Edun, Lucy Okell, Timothy M Wolock, Eline L Korenromp, Leigh F Johnson, Jeffrey W Imai-Eaton","doi":"10.1097/QAI.0000000000003878","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To enable comparable global assessments of viral load suppression (VLS) among people living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS applies a model to adjust VLS estimates reported at different thresholds to a common viral load ≤1000 copies/mL definition. We assessed performance of the current reverse Weibull model and alternatives using survey data from sub-Saharan Africa.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using data from 21 Population-based HIV Impact Assessment surveys in 16 sub-Saharan African countries (2015-2022), we assessed 6 models (Weibull, reverse Weibull, Pareto, Fréchet, gamma, and lognormal) in adjusting VLS reported at viral load <50, <200, <400 copies/mL to ≤1000. We compared predictions using parameters from Johnson et al and recalibrated using Population-based HIV Impact Assessment surveys, assessing whether new shape parameters improved adjustments and varied by sex and age.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In adjustments from all thresholds, the Weibull model had the lowest prediction errors (root-mean-squared error for <200 to ≤1000: Weibull: 1.9%; reverse Weibull: 3.1%; Pareto: 2.5%). Prediction errors for reverse Weibull and Pareto models were higher in subgroups with low VLS compared with Weibull. Across 21 surveys, in adjustments from <200 to ≤1000, reverse Weibull overestimated VLS by 2.3%, compared with 1.5% by Weibull and Pareto. The Fréchet, gamma, and lognormal models performed similarly to Weibull. Shape parameter estimates for the Weibull and reverse Weibull were slightly higher after recalibration and varied by sex and age.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Weibull, Fréchet, gamma, and lognormal models provided more reliable VLS adjustments across thresholds than the previously recommended reverse Weibull model, avoiding inflated VLS estimates that could obscure gaps in HIV treatment programs and underestimate HIV transmission risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":520658,"journal":{"name":"Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)","volume":" ","pages":"827-835"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13372362/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0000000000003878","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: To enable comparable global assessments of viral load suppression (VLS) among people living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS applies a model to adjust VLS estimates reported at different thresholds to a common viral load ≤1000 copies/mL definition. We assessed performance of the current reverse Weibull model and alternatives using survey data from sub-Saharan Africa.

Methods: Using data from 21 Population-based HIV Impact Assessment surveys in 16 sub-Saharan African countries (2015-2022), we assessed 6 models (Weibull, reverse Weibull, Pareto, Fréchet, gamma, and lognormal) in adjusting VLS reported at viral load <50, <200, <400 copies/mL to ≤1000. We compared predictions using parameters from Johnson et al and recalibrated using Population-based HIV Impact Assessment surveys, assessing whether new shape parameters improved adjustments and varied by sex and age.

Results: In adjustments from all thresholds, the Weibull model had the lowest prediction errors (root-mean-squared error for <200 to ≤1000: Weibull: 1.9%; reverse Weibull: 3.1%; Pareto: 2.5%). Prediction errors for reverse Weibull and Pareto models were higher in subgroups with low VLS compared with Weibull. Across 21 surveys, in adjustments from <200 to ≤1000, reverse Weibull overestimated VLS by 2.3%, compared with 1.5% by Weibull and Pareto. The Fréchet, gamma, and lognormal models performed similarly to Weibull. Shape parameter estimates for the Weibull and reverse Weibull were slightly higher after recalibration and varied by sex and age.

Conclusions: The Weibull, Fréchet, gamma, and lognormal models provided more reliable VLS adjustments across thresholds than the previously recommended reverse Weibull model, avoiding inflated VLS estimates that could obscure gaps in HIV treatment programs and underestimate HIV transmission risks.

利用撒哈拉以南非洲具有全国代表性的家庭调查数据,验证可比较估计数的艾滋病毒抑制阈值调整。
为了能够对接受抗逆转录病毒治疗(ART)的艾滋病毒感染者的病毒载量抑制(VLS)进行可比性的全球评估,联合国艾滋病规划署应用一个模型来调整在不同阈值下报告的病毒载量抑制(VLS)估计,以达到共同的VL≤1000拷贝/mL的定义。我们使用撒哈拉以南非洲的调查数据评估了当前反向威布尔模型和替代方案的性能。方法:使用16个撒哈拉以南非洲国家(2015-2022)的21个基于人口的艾滋病毒影响评估调查(PHIAs)的数据,我们评估了六种模型(威布尔,反向威布尔,帕累托,fr ,伽玛和对数正态)在调整VL报告的VLS时的预测误差。结果:在所有阈值的调整中,威布尔模型的预测误差最低(结论的均方根误差):与之前推荐的反向Weibull模型相比,Weibull、fr、gamma和对数正态模型提供了更可靠的VLS跨阈值调整,避免了夸大的VLS估计,这可能会掩盖艾滋病毒治疗方案的差距,并低估艾滋病毒传播风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书