Trial reportJournal of the International AIDS Society2025
Examining the effect of universal testing and treatment strategies for HIV prevention in Zambia and South Africa: generalizing the results of the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial.
Trial report in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionHIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 071 (PopART) was a cluster-randomized trial to evaluate universal testing and treatment (UTT) strategies for HIV prevention. HPTN071 compared three arms: (A) combination prevention with UTT; (B) combination prevention with universal testing and antiretroviral therapy initiation according to local guidelines; and (C) standard of care (SOC). Interventions were implemented in entire randomized communities, with impacts on HIV incidence measured in "population cohorts," that is the HPTN071 sample. Unexpectedly, a significantly lower incidence was not observed in arm A relative to SOC. Importantly, rates of participation in the HPTN071 sample differed among population subgroups, for example men were underrepresented.
methodsTo correct for underrepresented subgroups, PopART intervention effects are estimated in a population of interest, adults aged 18-44 in trial provinces, characterized with two nationally representative HIV-focused surveys. The HPTN071 sample is weighted to match the population of interest by demographics and HIV risk factors. Risk of HIV acquisition is compared across arms, both in the trial population (unweighted) and the population of interest (weighted). Both (1) the risk of HIV acquisition between 1 and 3 years and (2) the risk of HIV acquisition by 3 years are compared.
resultsIn the trial population, estimated risk in arm A is, counterintuitively, slightly higher than SOC (Year 1-3 Risk Difference [RD]: 0.10%; 95% CI: -1.15%, 1.25%). After weighting, risk in arm A is lower than SOC in the population of interest (RD: -0.34%; 95% CI: -2.04%, 0.96%). Weighting also strengthened the estimated effect in arm B relative to SOC (unweighted RD: -0.66%, 95% CI: -1.88%, 0.46%; weighted RD: -1.18%, 95% CI: -2.85%, 0.15%). Weighted year 3 risk difference estimates indicated even stronger possible intervention effects: A versus SOC -0.83% (95% CI: -2.94%, 0.99%), B versus SOC -1.86% (95% CI: -3.80%, -0.09%).
conclusionsPopART interventions are estimated to be more protective in the population of interest than observed in the HPTN071 sample. These results partially explain the unexpected finding in arm A, providing further support for UTT strategies for HIV prevention. This analysis also highlights the importance of considering heterogeneous treatment effects among population subgroups when measuring the overall efficacy of HIV interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.