The state of PrEP access in SA

By Thuthukile Mbatha, SECTION27

Young women between the ages of 15 and 24 years are among the key population groups with the highest risk of contracting HIV. It is estimated that about 2 000 HIV infections occur weekly in South Africa among this group. A number of HIV-prevention campaigns have been targeting the youth out of school. Young women between the ages of 15 and 24 years in higher education institutions are usually the last ones to find out about such initiatives. The assumption that young women in higher education institutions are more knowledgeable about HIV prevention – and therefore more responsible – is false. They are as vulnerable as the young women out of school.

South Africa has a number of HIV-prevention interventions that were introduced to try and curb the increasing number of HIV infections in the country. These include female and male condoms, medical male circumcision, treatment as prevention, Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP), and recently, Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP).

PrEP is not yet widely accessible in the public sector South Africa. It can only be accessed through demonstration sites, clinical research institutes, and the private sector. A month’s supply of a daily dose of PrEP costs between R300 and R550 from the private sector. However, not all medical aids will cover the costs.

PrEP is only given to HIV-negative people who self-identify as being at substantial risk of acquiring HIV. The demonstration sites have seen a very low uptake of PrEP by the key population groups. This has raised concerns about providing it to young women, as they too may have a hard time adhering to the dosage regime; in other words, they may not take it as prescribed.

Any introduction of a new prevention product or intervention meets a lot of scepticism from the targeted population to begin with. Many clinical trials have been done that have shown that a lot of interventions work; however, they all experience a low uptake at first. The female condom, for instance, has been around for several years, but has been under-used. There have been many campaigns and initiatives highlighting the importance of medical male circumcision, shown to decrease the chances of contracting HIV among men by 60 per cent; however, we are still seeing only a relatively slow increase in the number of young men being circumcised.

What have we learnt from past experiences? Are we still employing the same strategies that we applied in previous interventions? The US is one of the first countries to roll out PrEP; they also saw a low uptake at first, but it has been improving gradually.

The scepticism seen is fuelled by the failure of PrEP in some clinical trials, such as those for FEM PrEP and VOICE – both of which involved women. These studies were testing the effectiveness of oral PrEP among women at higher risk of contracting HIV. They had to be stopped early when it became clear that the studies would not be able to show whether or not the pill prevented HIV acquisition (due to low treatment adherence in the trials).

However, the main reason for this was found to be low adherence. The women in these two studies were not taking the PrEP as prescribed. This conclusion was supported by evidence of very low drug levels in their systems; another reason is that they did not perceive themselves as being at greater risk of contracting HIV. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), a person must take the PrEP pill daily for at least seven consecutive days before they are fully protected, and then continue taking it daily.

However, subsequent trials showed that in fact, PrEP does reduce risk in women. The Partners demonstration project was done using serodiscordant heterosexual couples as subjects, and proved effective. These are couples in which one partner is HIV-positive and on treatment, and the other is HIV-negative.

Some people are concerned that providing PrEP to young women will lead to promiscuity. However, there is no evidence of this among those taking PrEP. Furthermore, PrEP itself reduces the risk of HIV very effectively, so sex on PrEP should not be seen as ‘unprotected’. Sex on PrEP is ‘barrier-free’, perhaps, but certainly not unprotected or unsafe.

There’s a need here for a paradigm shift when discussing what is and isn’t ‘safer’ sex. Unlike condoms, which protect the user from pregnancy, STIs and HIV infection, PrEP only protects against contracting HIV. Someone taking PrEP would still need to use a condom or some other form of contraception as part of a combination prevention method.

As women, we value choice. For example, the decision to use Depo-Provera over an Intra-Uterine Device (IUD) as a family planning method lies solely with the individual. Young women in higher education institutions are no exception. They too need to be afforded the opportunity to choose which HIV-prevention option is best for them.

Studies have confirmed that PrEP works if you take it. So why are we not rolling it out to all young women at substantial risk of acquiring HIV? The alarming pregnancy rates in higher education institutions indicates low use of condoms and other family planning methods.

Providing PrEP to only a select group of people is not getting us anywhere. The country continues to see rising HIV infections among young women aged between 15 and 24 years. How many more infections do we have to see before we scale it up? Let’s equip young women with access to the best HIV prevention, and with the knowledge that will enable them to make informed decisions. The inclusion of PrEP into a comprehensive sexual and reproductive health package is the first step. PrEP campaigns should go hand in hand with campaigns to promote HIV testing and other available HIV-prevention tools.

Professor Quarraisha Abdool

One in five people with HIV – or who have newly acquired HIV – lives in South Africa, despite it being home to less than 1% of the global population. The use of phylogenetics to understand the infection of HIV highlights that about 24% of young women under 25 years of age do not know their HIV status; and about 60% are acquiring HIV from male partners who are on average eight or more years older than them, i.e. in the 25 to 40 age group. The majority of men of 25 to 40 years old are unaware of their HIV status and have high viral loads, suggesting recently acquired infection and hence higher transmission rates.

Young men are acquiring HIV from already infected women 25 to 35 years of age; on average, the age difference in these cases is about a year. About 40% of men 25 to 40 years old are having sex with women younger than 25 and women older than 25 concurrently, thus perpetuating these cycles of transmission. Preventing HIV infection in young women under 25 years will require a multi-pronged approach that includes Sexual and Reproductive Health Rights services to young women; finding the missing men (who do not access health services); and treatment of women older than 25.

Preventing HIV infection in adolescent girls and young women could change the course of the epidemic in Africa, and reverse the current poor global progress in HIV prevention. Oral tenofovir, alone or in combination with emtricitabine (PrEP), is the only woman-initiated prevention technology that does not require partner knowledge or co-operation. We cannot afford not to make this prevention option available to young women.

What is PrEP? PrEP – in full, Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis – is ARV drugs taken by HIV-negative people to protect themselves from getting HIV. The only drug combination registered as PrEP in South Africa is tenofovir and emtricitabine – widely known under the brandname Truvada.

 

Glossary of terms Adherance – refers to taking any form of treatment as prescribed, without missing a dose Clinical trials – refers to research studies involving human subjects Demonstration sites – serve two purposes: 1. They enable the country to learn enough about implementation issues related to PrEP so that the transition is more feasible between research (including demonstration project research) and the wider expansion and institutionalisation entailed in scaling up implementation. 2. They enable the World Health Organisation (WHO) to extract generalisable information for the eventual development of guidelines for PrEP delivery. Serodiscordant couples – intimate partners, regardless of gender, such that one is living with HIV and the other is HIV-negative Substantial risk – anyone who engages in regular condom-less sex with persons of unknown HIV status or who are HIV-positive is at greater risk of contracting HIV.

Why I take PrEP

Nomnotho Ntsele (20) is a second-year student at the Durban University of Technology. She also volunteers as a peer educator.

When I first heard about PrEP, I thought it was meant for promiscuous people – I did not think it was for me at all. The fact that it was only available to sex workers supported my assumptions. I did not understand that anyone could be at substantial risk of contracting HIV, especially young women my age. My opinion changed when I attended the Youth Dialogue in Prevention at SECTION27 in September, where I learnt a lot more about the science of PrEP, and realized that even I am at risk of contracting HIV.

I then started reading more about it, and incorporated the information I learnt in my peer-education work. I started telling other students in my institution about this other option for HIV prevention. Following my residence visits and talks, I was approached by students in serodiscordant relationships (where one partner is HIV-positive and the other HIV-negative) asking about where to access PrEP. I remembered that at the Youth Dialogue, we were told that the Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (CAPRISA) and the Wits Reproductive Health & HIV Institute are currently offering it to young women who are not part of clinical trials. I therefore referred them to CAPRISA.

As I myself am in a long-distance relationship, I realised that I am also at risk of contracting HIV. Moreover, I was curious to know how this PrEP pill works. I wanted to be able to address students’ concerns about side effects and other related questions. And maybe PrEP was for me too?

My decision to take PrEP almost broke my relationship with my boyfriend. He works in the north of KwaZulu-Natal, and we do not see each other often. He felt that my decision to take PrEP was motivated by a lack of trust in him. He wanted to leave me, and also accused me of cheating on him, saying that was the reason I’d decided to take the pill. After several arguments trying to explain to him why I’d decided to take PrEP, he went to a pharmacy to do blood tests, including an HIV test. He told me that he was ‘clean’. I continued to take PrEP.

I must say, it wasn’t easy in the beginning. Taking a pill when you are not sick is not child’s play. It doesn’t help that I suffered mild side effects – nausea, and a bit of dizziness – but they all subsided within a few days. I started taking PrEP during my exam preparations, so I used to take it every day at 21h00. Now that I have finished writing, 21h00 is no longer convenient for me. I take it earlier now.

A lot of my peers at university would benefit from PrEP. Most of them are dating celebrities, or guys who have money. I imagine some of them think they are ‘exclusive’, but this would be a lie. Though if CAPRISA didn’t provide PrEP through its study clinic, and I had to pay for it, I wouldn’t have considered it. I already have competing needs – buying PrEP with my financial aid money would be the last thing on my mind. The government should provide PrEP to everyone who needs it.