Search

Introduction: HIV controllers have low viral loads (VL) without antiretroviral treatment (ART). We evaluated viraemic control in a community‐randomized trial conducted in Zambia and South Africa that evaluated the impact of a combination prevention intervention on HIV incidence (HPTN 071 [PopART]; 2013–2018). Methods: VL and antiretroviral (ARV) drug testing were performed using plasma samples collected 2 years after enrolment for 4072 participants who were HIV positive at the start of the study intervention. ARV drug use was assessed using a qualitative laboratory assay that detects 22 ARV drugs in five drug classes. Participants were classified as non‐controllers if they had a VL ≥2000 copies/ml with no ARV drugs detected at this visit. Additional VL and ARV drug testing was performed at a second annual study visit to confirm controller status. Participants were classified as controllers if they had VLs <2000 with no ARV drugs detected at both visits. Non‐controllers who had ARV drugs detected at either visit were excluded from the analysis to minimize potential confounders associated with ARV drug access and uptake. Results: The final cohort included 126 viraemic controllers and 766 non‐controllers who had no ARV drugs detected. The prevalence of controllers among the 4072 persons assessed was 3.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.6%, 3.6%). This should be considered a minimum estimate, since high rates of ARV drug use in the parent study limited the ability to identify controllers. Among the 892 participants in the final cohort, controller status was associated with biological sex (female > male, p = 0.027). There was no significant association between controller status and age, study country or herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV‐2) status at study enrolment. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this report presents the first large‐scale, population‐level study evaluating the prevalence of viraemic control and associated factors in Africa. A key advantage of this study was that a biomedical assessment was used to assess ARV drug use (vs. self‐reported data). This study identified a large cohort of HIV controllers and non‐controllers not taking ARV drugs, providing a unique repository of longitudinal samples for additional research. This cohort may be useful for further studies investigating the mechanisms of virologic control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Universal HIV testing and treatment aims to identify all people living with HIV and offer them treatment, decreasing the number of individuals with unsuppressed HIV and thus reducing HIV transmission. Longitudinal follow‐up of individuals with and without HIV in a cluster‐randomized trial of communities allowed for the examination of community‐ and individual‐level measures of HIV risk and HIV incidence. Methods: HPTN 071 (PopART) was a three‐arm cluster‐randomized trial conducted between 2013 and 2018 that evaluated the use of two combination HIV prevention strategies implemented at the community level to reduce HIV incidence compared to the standard of care. The trial, conducted in 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa, measured HIV incidence over 36 months in a population cohort of ∼2000 randomly selected adults per community aged 18–44. Multilevel models were used to assess the association between HIV incidence and community‐ and individual‐level socio‐demographic and behavioural risk factors, as well as prevalence of detectable virus (PDV) defined as the estimated proportion of the community with unsuppressed viral load. Results: Overall HIV incidence was 1.49/100 person‐years. Communities with less financial wealth and communities with more individuals reporting having sex partners outside of the community or two or more sexual partners had higher HIV incidence. PDV at 2 years of study was 6.8% and was strongly associated with HIV incidence: for every 50% relative reduction in community PDV, there was a 49% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 37%–58%, p < 0.001) relative decrease in HIV incidence. At the individual level; socio‐economic status, AUDIT score, medical male circumcision and certain sexual behaviours were associated with HIV risk. Conclusions: Using data from the PopART randomized trial, we found several associations of HIV incidence with community‐level measures reflecting the sexual behaviour and socio‐economic make‐up of each community. We also found a strong association between community PDV and HIV incidence supporting the use of PDV as a tool for monitoring progress in controlling the epidemic. Lastly, we found significant individual‐level factors of HIV risk that are generally consistent with previous HIV epidemiological research. These results have the potential to identify high high‐incidence communities, inform structural‐level interventions, and optimize individual‐level interventions for HIV prevention. Clinical Trial Number: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01900977, HPTN 071 [PopArt] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: To investigate the association between individual and community‐level measures of HIV stigma and HIV incidence within the 21 communities participating in the HPTN (071) PopART trial in Zambia and South Africa. Methods: Secondary analysis of data from a population‐based cohort followed‐up over 36 months between 2013 and 2018. The outcome was rate of incident HIV infection among individuals who were HIV negative at cohort entry. Individual‐level exposures, measured in a random sample of all participants, were: (1) perception of stigma in the community, (2) perception of stigma in health settings and (3) fear and judgement towards people living with HIV. Individual‐level analyses were conducted with adjusted, individual‐level Poisson regression. Community‐level HIV stigma exposures drew on data reported by people living with HIV, health workers and community members. We used linear regression to explore the association between HIV stigma and community‐level HIV incidence. Results: Among 8172 individuals who were HIV negative and answered individual‐level stigma questions at enrolment to the cohort, there was no evidence of a statistically significant association between any domain of HIV stigma and risk of incident HIV infection. Among the full cohort of 26,110 individuals among whom HIV incidence was measured, there was no evidence that community‐level HIV incidence was associated with any domain of HIV stigma. Conclusions: HIV stigma is often cited as a barrier to the effectiveness of HIV prevention programming. However, in the setting for the HPTN 071 "PopART trial," measured stigma alone was not associated with the risk of HIV infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The HPTN 071 (PopART) trial demonstrated that universal HIV testing‐and‐treatment reduced community‐level HIV incidence. Door‐to‐door delivery of HIV testing services (HTS) was one of the main components of the intervention. From an early stage, men were less likely to know their HIV status than women, primarily because they were not home during service delivery. To reach more men, different strategies were implemented during the trial. We present the relative contribution of these strategies to coverage of HTS and the impact of community hubs implemented after completion of the trial among men. Methods: Between 2013 and 2017, three intervention rounds (IRs) of door‐to‐door HTS delivery were conducted in eight PopART communities in Zambia. Additional strategies implemented in parallel, included: community‐wide "Man‐up" campaigns (IR1), smaller HTS campaigns at work/social places (IR2) and revisits to households with the option of HIV self‐testing (HIVST) (IR3). In 2018, community "hubs" offering HTS were implemented for 7 months in all eight communities. Population enumeration data for each round of HTS provided the denominator, allowing for calculation of the proportion of men tested as a result of each strategy during different time periods. Results: By the end of the three IRs, 65–75% of men were reached with HTS, primarily through door‐to‐door service delivery. In IR1 and IR2, "Man‐up" and work/social place campaigns accounted for ∼1 percentage point each and in IR3, revisits with the option of self‐testing for ∼15 percentage points of this total coverage per IR. The yield of newly diagnosed HIV‐positive men ranged from 2.2% for HIVST revisits to 9.9% in work/social places. At community hubs, the majority of visitors accepting services were men (62.8%). In total, we estimated that ∼36% (2.2% tested HIV positive) of men resident but not found at their household during IR3 of PopART accessed HTS provided at the hubs after trial completion. Conclusions: Achieving high coverage of HTS among men requires universal, home‐based service delivery combined with an option of HIVST and delivery of HTS through community‐based hubs. When men are reached, they are willing to test for HIV. Reaching men thus requires implementers to adapt their HTS delivery strategies to meet men's needs. Clinical Trial Number: NCT01900977 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Cross‐sectional incidence testing is used to estimate population‐level HIV incidence and measure the impact of prevention interventions. There are limited data evaluating the accuracy of estimates in settings where antiretroviral therapy coverage and levels of viral suppression are high. Understanding cross‐sectional incidence estimates in these settings is important as viral suppression can lead to false recent test results. We compared the accuracy of multi‐assay algorithms (MAA) for incidence estimation to that observed in the community‐randomized HPTN 071 (PopART) trial, where the majority of participants with HIV infection were virally suppressed. Methods: HIV incidence was assessed during the second year of the study, and included only individuals who were tested for HIV at visits 1 and 2 years after the start of the study (2016–2017). Incidence estimates from three MAAs were compared to the observed incidence between years 1 and 2 (MAA‐C: LAg‐Avidity <2.8 ODn + BioRad Avidity Index <95% + VL >400 copies/ml; LAg+VL MAA: LAg‐Avidity <1.5 ODn + VL >1000 copies/ml; Rapid+VL MAA: Asanté recent rapid result + VL >1000 copies/ml). The mean duration of recent infection (MDRI) used for the three MAAs was 248, 130 and 180 days, respectively. Results and discussion: The study consisted of: 15,845 HIV‐negative individuals; 4406 HIV positive at both visits; and 221 who seroconverted between visits. Viral load (VL) data were available for all HIV‐positive participants at the 2‐year visit. Sixty four (29%) of the seroconverters and 3227 (72%) prevelant positive participants were virally supressed (<400 copies/ml). Observed HIV incidence was 1.34% (95% CI: 1.17–1.53). Estimates of incidence were similar to observed incidence for MAA‐C, 1.26% (95% CI: 1.02–1.51) and the LAg+VL MAA, 1.29 (95% CI: 0.97–1.62). Incidence estimated by the Rapid+VL MAA was significantly lower than observed incidence (0.92%, 95% CI: 0.69–1.15, p<0.01). Conclusions: MAA‐C and the LAg+VL MAA provided accurate point estimates of incidence in this cohort with high levels of viral suppression. The Rapid+VL significantly underestimated incidence, suggesting that the MDRI recommended by the manufacturer is too long or the assay is not accurately detecting enough recent infections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: HIV and tuberculosis are frequently diagnosed concurrently. In March 2021, World Health Organization recommended that antiretroviral therapy (ART) should be started within two weeks of tuberculosis treatment start, at any CD4 count. We assessed whether earlier ART improved outcomes in people with newly diagnosed HIV and tuberculosis. Methods: We did a systematic review by searching nine databases for trials that compared earlier ART to later ART initiation in people with HIV and tuberculosis. We included studies published from database inception to 12 March 2021. We compared ART within four weeks versus ART more than four weeks after TB treatment, and ART within two weeks versus ART between two and eight weeks, and stratified analysis by CD4 count. The main outcome was death; secondary outcomes included IRIS and AIDS‐defining events. We pooled effect estimates using random effects meta‐analysis. Results and discussion: We screened 2468 abstracts, and identified nine trials. Among people with all CD4 counts, there was no difference in mortality by earlier ART (≤4 week) versus later ART (>4 week) (risk difference [RD] 0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] −2% to +1%). Among people with CD4 count ≤50 cells/mm3, earlier ART (≤4 weeks) reduced risk of death (RD −6%, −10% to −1%). Among people with all CD4 counts earlier ART (≤4 weeks) increased the risk of IRIS (RD +6%, 95% CI +2% to +10%) and reduced the incidence of AIDS‐defining events (RD −2%, 95% CI −4% to 0%). Results were similar when trials were restricted to the four trials which permitted comparison of ART within two weeks to ART between two and eight weeks. Trials were conducted between 2004 and 2014, before recommendations to treat HIV at any CD4 count or to rapidly start ART in people without TB. No trials included children or pregnant women. No trials included integrase inhibitors in ART regimens. Discussion: Earlier ART did not alter risk of death overall among people living with HIV who had TB disease. For logistical and patient preference reasons, earlier ART initiation for everyone with TB and HIV may be preferred to later ART. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Achieving HIV epidemic control globally will require new strategies to accelerate reductions in HIV incidence and mortality. Universal test and treat (UTT) was evaluated in four randomized population‐based trials (BCPP/Ya Tsie, HPTN 071/PopART, SEARCH, ANRS 12249/TasP) conducted in sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA) during expanded antiretroviral treatment (ART) eligibility by World Health Organization guidelines and the UNAIDS 90‐90‐90 campaign. Discussion: These three‐year studies were conducted in Botswana, Zambia, Uganda, Kenya and South Africa in settings with baseline HIV prevalence from 4% to 30%. Key observations across studies were: (1) Universal testing (implemented via a variety of home and community‐based testing approaches) achieved >90% coverage in all studies. (2) When coupled with robust linkage to HIV care, rapid ART start and patient‐centred care, UTT achieved among the highest reported population levels of viral suppression in SSA. Significant gains in population‐level viral suppression were made in regions with both low and high baseline population viral load; however, viral suppression gains were not uniform across all sub‐populations and were lower among youth. (3) UTT resulted in marked reductions in community HIV incidence when universal testing and robust linkage were present. However, HIV elimination targets were not reached. In BCPP and HPTN 071, annualized HIV incidence was approximately 20% to 30% lower in the intervention (which included universal testing) compared to control arms (no universal testing). In SEARCH (where both arms had universal testing), incidence declined 32% over three years. (4) UTT reduced HIV associated mortality by 23% in the intervention versus control communities in SEARCH, a study in which mortality was comprehensively measured. Conclusions: These trials provide strong evidence that UTT inclusive of universal testing increases population‐level viral suppression and decreases HIV incidence and mortality faster than the status quo in SSA and should be adapted at a sub‐country level as a public health strategy. However, more is needed, including integration of new prevention interventions into UTT, in order to reach UNAIDS HIV elimination targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Introduction: Qualitative data are lacking on the impact of mobility among people living with HIV (PLHIV) and their decision‐making around anti‐retroviral treatment (ART). We describe challenges of juggling household responsibility, livelihood mobility and HIV management for six PLHIV in urban Zambia. Methods: Six PLHIV (three men and three women, aged 21 to 44) were recruited from different geographic zones in one urban community drawn from a qualitative cohort in a social science component of a cluster‐randomized trial (HPTN071 PopART). Participants were on ART (n = 2), not on ART (n = 2) and had started and stopped ART (n = 2). At least two in‐depth interviews and participant observations, and three drop‐in household visits with each were carried out between February and August 2017. Themed and comparative analysis was conducted. Results: The six participants relied on the informal economy to meet basic household needs. Routine livelihood mobility, either within the community and to a nearby town centre, or further afield for longer periods of time, was essential to get by. Although aware of ART benefits, only one of the six participants managed to successfully access and sustain treatment. The other five struggled to find time to access ART alongside other priorities, routine mobility and when daily routines were more chaotic. Difficulty in accessing ART was exacerbated by local health facility factors (congestion, a culture of reprimanding PLHIV who miss appointments, sporadic rationed drug supply), stigma and more limited social capital. Conclusions: Using a time‐space framework illustrated how household responsibility, livelihood mobility and HIV management every day were like spinning plates, each liable to topple and demanding constant attention. If universal lifelong ART is to be delivered, the current service model needs to adjust the limited time that some PLHIV have to access ART because of household responsibilities and the need to earn a living moving around, often away from home. Practical strategies that could facilitate ART access in the context of livelihood mobility include challenging the practice of reprimand, improving drug supply, having ART services more widely distributed, mapped and available at night and weekends, and an effective centralized client health information system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe the associations between socio-economic position and prevalent tuberculosis in the 2010 ZAMSTAR Tuberculosis Prevalence Survey, one of the first large tuberculosis prevalence surveys in Southern Africa in the HIV era.Methods: The main analyses used data on 34 446 individuals in Zambia and 30 017 individuals in South Africa with evaluable tuberculosis culture results. Logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios for prevalent TB by two measures of socio-economic position: household wealth, derived from data on assets using principal components analysis, and individual educational attainment. Mediation analysis was used to evaluate potential mechanisms for the observed social gradients.Results: The quartile with highest household wealth index in Zambia and South Africa had, respectively, 0.55 (95% CI 0.33-0.92) times and 0.70 (95% CI 0.54-0.93) times the adjusted odds of prevalent TB of the bottom quartile. College or university-educated individuals in Zambia and South Africa had, respectively, 0.25 (95% CI 0.12-0.54) and 0.42 (95% CI 0.25-0.70) times the adjusted odds of prevalent TB of individuals who had received only primary education. We found little evidence that these associations were mediated via several key proximal risk factors for TB, including HIV status.Conclusion: These data suggest that social determinants of TB remain important even in the context of generalised HIV epidemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

DESIGN: Universal voluntary HIV counselling and testing followed by prompt initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for all those diagnosed HIV-infected (universal test and treat, UTT) is now a global health standard. However, its population-level impact, feasibility and cost remain unknown. Five community-based trials have been implemented in sub-Saharan Africa to measure the effects of various UTT strategies at population level: BCPP/YaTsie in Botswana, MaxART in Swaziland, HPTN 071 (PopART) in South Africa and Zambia, SEARCH in Uganda and Kenya and ANRS 12249 TasP in South Africa. This report describes and contrasts the contexts, research methodologies, intervention packages, themes explored, evolution of study designs and interventions related to each of these five UTT trials. METHODS: We conducted a comparative assessment of the five trials using data extracted from study protocols and collected during baseline studies, with additional input from study investigators. We organized differences and commonalities across the trials in five categories: trial contexts, research designs, intervention packages, trial themes and adaptations. RESULTS: All performed in the context of generalized HIV epidemics, the trials highly differ in their social, demographic, economic, political and health systems settings. They share the common aim of assessing the impact of UTT on the HIV epidemic but differ in methodological aspects such as study design and eligibility criteria for trial populations. In addition to universal ART initiation, the trials deliver a wide range of biomedical, behavioural and structural interventions as part of their UTT strategies. The five studies explore common issues, including the uptake rates of the trial services and individual health outcomes. All trials have adapted since their initiation to the evolving political, economic and public health contexts, including adopting the successive national recommendations for ART initiation. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial commonalities but also differences between the five UTT trials in their design, conduct and multidisciplinary outputs. As empirical literature on how UTT may improve efficiency and quality of HIV care at population level is still scarce, this article provides a foundation for more collaborative research on UTT and supports evidence-based decision making for HIV care in country and internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Population-wide HIV testing services (HTS) must be delivered in order to achieve universal antiretroviral treatment (ART) coverage. To accurately deliver HTS at such scale, non-facility-based HIV point-of-care testing (HIV-POCT) is necessary but requires rigorous quality assurance (QA). This study assessed the performance of community-wide HTS in Zambia and South Africa (SA) as part of the HPTN 071 (PopART) study and explores the impact of quality improvement interventions on HTS performance. Methods: Between 2014 and 2016, HIV-POCT was undertaken within households both as part of the randomly selected HPTN 071 research cohort (Population Cohort [PC]) and as part of the intervention provided by community HIV-care providers. HIV-POCT followed national algorithms in both countries. Consenting PC participants provided a venous blood sample in addition to being offered HIV-POCT. We compared results obtained in the PC using a laboratory-based gold standard (GS) testing algorithm and HIV-POCT. Comprehensive QA mechanisms were put in place to support the community-wide testing. Participants who were identified as having a false negative or false positive HIV rapid test were revisited and offered retesting. Results: We initially observed poor sensitivity (45-54%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 31-69) of HIV-POCT in the PC in SA compared to sensitivity in Zambia for the same time period of 95.8% (95% CI 93-98). In both countries, specificity of HIV-POCT was >98%. With enhanced QA interventions and adoption of the same HIV-POCT algorithm, sensitivity in SA improved to a similar level as in Zambia. Conclusions: This is one of the first reports of HIV-POCT performance during wide-scale delivery of HTS compared to a GS laboratory algorithm. HIV-POCT in a real-world setting had a lower sensitivity than anticipated. Appropriate choice of HIV-POCT algorithms, intensive training and supervision, and robust QA mechanisms are necessary to optimize HIV-POCT test performance when testing is delivered at a community level. HIV-POCT in clients who did not disclose that they were on ART may have contributed to false negative HIV-POCT results and should be the topic of future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Integrating standardized measures of HIV stigma and discrimination into research studies of emerging HIV prevention approaches could enhance uptake and retention of these approaches, and care and treatment for people living with HIV (PLHIV), by informing stigma mitigation strategies. We sought to develop a succinct set of measures to capture key domains of stigma for use in research on HIV prevention technologies. Methods: From 2013 to 2015, we collected baseline data on HIV stigma from three populations (PLHIV (N = 4053), community members (N = 5782) and health workers (N = 1560)) in 21 study communities in South Africa and Zambia participating in the HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster‐randomized trial. Forty questions were adapted from a harmonized set of measures developed in a consultative, global process. Informed by theory and factor analysis, we developed seven scales, with values ranging from 0 to 3, based on a 4‐point agreement Likert, and calculated means to assess different aspects of stigma. Higher means reflected more stigma. We developed two measures capturing percentages of PLHIV who reported experiencing any stigma in communities or healthcare settings in the past 12 months. We validated our measures by examining reliability using Cronbach's alpha and comparing the distribution of responses across characteristics previously associated with HIV stigma. Results: Thirty‐five questions ultimately contributed to seven scales and two experience measures. All scales demonstrated acceptable to very good internal consistency. Among PLHIV, a scale captured internalized stigma, and experience measures demonstrated that 22.0% of PLHIV experienced stigma in the community and 7.1% in healthcare settings. Three scales for community members assessed fear and judgement, perceived stigma in the community and perceived stigma in healthcare settings. Similarly, health worker scales assessed fear and judgement, perceived stigma in the community and perceived co‐worker stigma in healthcare settings. A higher proportion of community members and health workers reported perceived stigma than the proportion of PLHIV who reported experiences of stigma. Conclusions: We developed novel, valid measures that allowed for triangulation of HIV stigma across three populations in a large‐scale study. Such comparisons will illuminate how stigma influences and is influenced by programmatic changes to HIV service delivery over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The ability to achieve an accurate test result and interpret it correctly is critical to the impact and effectiveness of HIV self‐testing (HIVST). Simple and easy‐to‐use devices, instructions for use (IFU) and other support tools have been shown to be key to good performance in sub‐Saharan Africa and may be highly contextual. The objective of this study was to explore the utility of cognitive interviewing in optimizing the local understanding of manufacturers' IFUs to achieve an accurate HIVST result. Methods: Functionally literate and antiretroviral therapy‐naive participants were purposefully selected between May 2016 and June 2017 to represent intended users of HIV self‐tests from urban and rural areas in Malawi and Zambia. Participants were asked to follow IFUs for HIVST. We then conducted cognitive interviews and observed participants while they attempted to complete the HIVST steps using a structured guide, which mirrored the steps in the IFU. Qualitative data were analysed using a thematic approach. Results: Of a total of 61 participants, many successfully performed most steps in the IFU. Some had difficulties in understanding these and made errors, which could have led to incorrect test results, such as incorrect use of buffer and reading the results prematurely. Participants with lower levels of literacy and inexperience with standard pictorial images were more likely to struggle with IFUs. Difficulties tended to be more pronounced among those in rural settings. Ambiguous terms and translations in the IFU, unfamiliar images and symbols, and unclear order of the steps to be followed were most commonly linked to errors and lower comprehension among participants. Feedback was provided to the manufacturer on the findings, which resulted in further optimization of IFUs. Conclusions: Cognitive interviewing identifies local difficulties in conducting HIVST from manufacturer‐translated IFUs. It is a useful and practical methodology to optimize IFUs and make them more understandable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Scale‐up of HIV self‐testing (HIVST) will play a key role in meeting the United Nation's 90‐90‐90 targets. Delayed re‐reading of used HIVST devices has been used by early implementation studies to validate the performance of self‐test kits and to estimate HIV positivity among self‐testers. We investigated the stability of results on used devices under controlled conditions to assess its potential as a quality assurance approach for HIVST scale‐up. Methods: 444 OraQuick®HIV‐1/2 rapid antibody tests were conducted using commercial plasma from two HIV‐positive donors and HIV‐negative plasma (high‐reactive n = 148, weak‐reactive n = 148 and non‐reactive n = 148) and incubated them for six months under four conditions (combinations of high and low temperatures and humidity). Devices were re‐read daily for one week, weekly for one subsequent month and then once a month by independent readers unaware of the previous results. We used multistage transition models to investigate rates of change in device results, and between storage conditions. Results and discussion: There was a high incidence of device instability. Forty‐three (29%) of 148 initially non‐reactive results became false weak‐reactive results. These changes were observed across all incubation conditions, the earliest on Day 4 (n = 9 kits). No initially HIV‐reactive results changed to a non‐reactive result. There were no significant associations between storage conditions and hazard of results transition. We observed substantial statistical agreement between independent re‐readers over time (agreement range: 0.74 to 0.96). Conclusions: Delayed re‐reading of used OraQuick®HIV‐1/2 rapid antibody tests is not currently a valid methodological approach to quality assurance and monitoring as we observed a high incidence (29%) of true non‐reactive tests changing to false weak‐reactive and therefore its use may overestimate true HIV positivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]