RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Use of HIV Recency Assays for HIV Incidence Estimation and Non-Incidence Surveillance Use Cases: A systematic review JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2021.08.23.21262504 DO 10.1101/2021.08.23.21262504 A1 Shelley N. Facente A1 Lillian Agyei A1 Andrew D. Maher A1 Mary Mahy A1 Shona Dalal A1 David Lowrance A1 Eduard Grebe A1 Kimberly Marsh YR 2021 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/08/26/2021.08.23.21262504.abstract AB Introduction HIV assays designed to detect recent infection, also known as “recency assays,” are often used to estimate HIV incidence in a specific country, region, or subpopulation, alone or as part of recent infection testing algorithms (RITAs). Recently, many countries and organizations have become interested in using recency assays within case surveillance systems and routine HIV testing services, and in measuring other indicators beyond incidence, generally referred to as “non-incidence surveillance use cases.”Methods To identify best methodological and field implementation practices for the use of recency assays to estimate HIV incidence and trends in recent infections for key populations or specific geographic areas, we undertook: 1) a global Call for Information released from WHO/UNAIDS; and 2) a systematic review of the literature to: (a) assess the field performance characteristics of commercially available recency assays, (b) understand the use of recency testing for surveillance in programmatic and laboratory settings, and (c) review methodologies for implementing recency testing for both incidence estimation and non-incidence use cases.Results and discussion Among the 90 documents ultimately reviewed, 65 (88%) focused on assay/algorithm performance or methodological descriptions, with high-quality evidence of accurate age- and sex- disaggregated HIV incidence estimation at national or regional levels in general population settings, but not at finer geographic levels for prevention prioritization. The remaining 25 documents described field-derived incidence (n=14) and non-incidence (n=11) use cases, including integrating RITAs into routine surveillance and assisting with molecular genetic analyses, but evidence was generally weaker or only reported on what was done, without validation data or findings related to effectiveness of recency assays when used for these purposes.Conclusions HIV recency assays have been widely validated for estimating HIV incidence in age- and sex-specific populations at national and sub-national regional levels; however, there was a lack of evidence validating the accuracy and effectiveness of using recency assays for non-incidence surveillance use cases. The evidence identified through this review will be used in forthcoming technical guidance on the use of HIV recency assays for surveillance use cases by WHO and UNAIDS; further evidence on methodologies and effectiveness of non-incidence use cases is needed.Competing Interest StatementSNF and EG have received consulting income and research support from Sedia Biosciences Corporation and Gilead Pharmaceuticals.Funding StatementFunding for this work was provided by UNAIDS; SNF, LA, ADM, and EG received consulting fees for this work on this systematic review and manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:N/AAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesDetails of the search terms and results of this systematic review are available as supplemental material.