This paper makes five key points. First is that the aggregate effect of radical and sustained behavioural changes in a sufficient number of individuals potentially at risk is needed for successful reductions in HIV transmission. Second, combination prevention is essential since HIV prevention is neither simple nor simplistic. Reductions in HIV transmission need widespread and sustained efforts, and a mix of communication channels to disseminate messages to motivate people to engage in a range of options to reduce risk. Third, prevention programmes can do better. The effect of behavioural strategies could be increased by aiming for many goals (eg, delay in onset of first intercourse, reduction in number of sexual partners, increases in condom use, etc) that are achieved by use of multilevel approaches (eg, couples, families, social and sexual networks, institutions, and entire communities) with populations both uninfected and infected with HIV. Fourth, prevention science can do better. Interventions derived from behavioural science have a role in overall HIV-prevention efforts, but they are insufficient when used by themselves to produce substantial and lasting reductions in HIV transmission between individuals or in entire communities. Fifth, we need to get the simple things right. The fundamentals of HIV prevention need to be agreed upon, funded, implemented, measured, and achieved. That, presently, is not the case.

In Latin America, transgender women (transwomen or male to female transgenders) have been included in MSM research but without addressing their specific needs in terms of the HIV/AIDS. We present results of the first seroepidemiologic study designed for transwomen in Peru. We conducted a study using respondent driven sampling to recruit transwomen from Lima. Our survey explored sociodemographic characteristics, gender enhancement procedures and sexual behavior. In addition, we conducted laboratory based HIV, genital herpes (HSV2) and syphilis testing. A total of 450 transwomen were recruited between April and July 2009. HIV prevalence was 30%, HSV2: 79% and syphilis: 23%. Sex-work was the main economic activity (64%). Gender enhancement procedures were reported by 70% of the population. Multivariable analysis showed HIV infection to be associated with being older than 35 recent, syphilis infection and HSV2 infection. Transwomen are the group most vulnerable to HIV/AIDS in Peru.

Clinical trial data have shown that oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is efficacious when taken as prescribed; however, PrEP adherence is complex and must be understood within the context of variable risk for HIV infection and use of other HIV prevention methods. Different levels of adherence may be needed in different populations to achieve HIV prevention, and the optimal methods for achieving the necessary adherence for both individual and public health benefits are unknown. Guidance for PrEP use must consider these questions to determine the success of PrEP-based HIV prevention programs. In this article, we propose a new paradigm for understanding and measuring PrEP adherence, termed prevention-effective adherence, which incorporates dynamic HIV acquisition risk behaviors and the use of HIV alternative prevention strategies. We discuss the need for daily PrEP use only during periods of risk for HIV exposure, describe key issues for measuring and understanding relevant behaviors, review lessons from another health prevention field (i.e., family planning), and provide guidance for prevention-effective PrEP use. Moreover, we challenge emerging calls for sustained, near perfect PrEP adherence regardless of risk exposure and offer a more practical and public health-focused vision for this prevention intervention.

BackgroundA coordinated response to HIV/AIDS remains one of the 'grand challenges' facing policymakers today. Global health initiatives (GHIs) have the potential both to facilitate and exacerbate coordination at the national and subnational level. Evidence of the effects of GHIs on coordination is beginning to emerge but has hitherto been limited to single-country studies and broad-brush reviews. To date, no study has provided a focused synthesis of the effects of GHIs on national and subnational health systems across multiple countries. To address this deficit, we review primary data from seven country studies on the effects of three GHIs on coordination of HIV/AIDS programmes: the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), and the World Bank's HIV/AIDS programmes including the Multi-country AIDS Programme (MAP).MethodsIn-depth interviews were conducted at national and subnational levels (179 and 218 respectively) in seven countries in Europe, Asia, Africa and South America, between 2006 and 2008. Studies explored the development and functioning of national and subnational HIV coordination structures, and the extent to which coordination efforts around HIV/AIDS are aligned with and strengthen country health systems.ResultsPositive effects of GHIs included the creation of opportunities for multisectoral participation, greater political commitment and increased transparency among most partners. However, the quality of participation was often limited, and some GHIs bypassed coordination mechanisms, especially at the subnational level, weakening their effectiveness.ConclusionsThe paper identifies residual national and subnational obstacles to effective coordination and optimal use of funds by focal GHIs, which these GHIs, other donors and country partners need to collectively address.

Health systems have improved their abilities to identify, diagnose, treat and, increasingly, achieve viral suppression among people living with HIV (PLHIV). Despite these advances, a higher burden of multimorbidity and poorer health-related quality of life are reported by many PLHIV in comparison to people without HIV. Stigma and discrimination further exacerbate these poor outcomes. A global multidisciplinary group of HIV experts developed a consensus statement identifying key issues that health systems must address in order to move beyond the HIV field’s longtime emphasis on viral suppression to instead deliver integrated, person-centered healthcare for PLHIV throughout their lives.