Impact of HIV self-testing for oral pre-exposure prophylaxis scale-up on drug resistance and HIV outcomes in western Kenya: a modelling study

Background Community-based oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) provision has the potential to expand PrEP coverage. HIV self-testing can facilitate PrEP community-based delivery but might have lower sensitivity than facility-based HIV testing, potentially leading to inappropriate PrEP use among people with HIV and subsequent development of drug resistance. We aimed to evaluate the impact of HIV self-testing use for PrEP scale-up. Methods We parameterised an agent-based network model, EMOD-HIV, to simulate generic tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine PrEP scale-up in western Kenya using four testing scenarios: provider-administered nucleic acid testing, provider-administered rapid diagnostic tests detecting antibodies, blood-based HIV self-testing, or oral fluid HIV self-testing. Scenarios were compared with a no PrEP counterfactual. Individuals aged 18-49 years with one or more heterosexual partners who screened HIV-negative were eligible for PrEP. We assessed the cost and health impact of rapid PrEP scale-up with high coverage over 20 years, and the budget impact over 5 years, using various HIV testing modalities. Findings PrEP coverage of 29% was projected to avert approximately 54% of HIV infections and 17% of HIV-related deaths among adults aged 18-49 years over 20 years; health impacts were similar across HIV testing modalities used to deliver PrEP. The percentage of HIV infections with PrEP-associated nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) drug resistance was 0 center dot 6% (95% uncertainty intervals 0 center dot 4-0 center dot 9) in the blood HIV self-testing scenario and 0 center dot 8% (0 center dot 6-1 center dot 0) in the oral HIV self-testing scenario, compared with 0 center dot 3% (0 center dot 2-0 center dot 3) in the antibody rapid diagnostic testing scenario and 0 center dot 2% (0 center dot 1-0 center dot 2) in the nucleic acid testing scenario. Accounting for background NRTI resistance, we found similarly low proportions of drug resistance across scenarios. The budget impact of implementing PrEP using HIV self-testing and provider-administered rapid diagnostic tests were similar, while nucleic acid testing was approximately 50% more costly. Interpretation Scaling up PrEP using HIV self-testing has similar health impacts, costs, and low risk of drug resistance as provider-administered rapid diagnostic tests. Policy makers should consider leveraging HIV self-testing to expand PrEP access among those at HIV risk. Funding The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Copyright (c) 2024 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.