SummaryBackgroundSharing of equipment used for injecting drug use (IDU) is a substantial cause of disease burden and a contributor to blood-borne virus transmission. We did a global multistage systematic review to identify the prevalence of IDU among people aged 15–64 years; sociodemographic characteristics of and risk factors for people who inject drugs (PWID); and the prevalence of HIV, hepatitis C virus (HCV), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) among PWID.MethodsConsistent with the GATHER and PRISMA guidelines and without language restrictions, we systematically searched peer-reviewed databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO; articles published since 2008, latest searches in June, 2017), searched the grey literature (websites and databases, searches between April and August, 2016), and disseminated data requests to international experts and agencies (requests sent in October, 2016). We searched for data on IDU prevalence, characteristics of PWID, including gender, age, and sociodemographic and risk characteristics, and the prevalence of HIV, HCV, and HBV among PWID. Eligible data on prevalence of IDU, HIV antibody, HBsAg, and HCV antibody among PWID were selected and, where multiple estimates were available, pooled for each country via random effects meta-analysis. So too were eligible data on percentage of PWID who were female; younger than 25 years; recently homeless; ever arrested; ever incarcerated; who had recently engaged in sex work, sexual risk, or injecting risk; and whose main drugs injected were opioids or stimulants. We generated regional and global estimates in line with previous global reviews.FindingsWe reviewed 55 671 papers and reports, and extracted data from 1147 eligible records. Evidence of IDU was recorded in 179 of 206 countries or territories, which cover 99% of the population aged 15–64 years, an increase of 31 countries (mostly in sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific Islands) since a review in 2008. IDU prevalence estimates were identified in 83 countries. We estimate that there are 15·6 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 10·2–23·7 million) PWID aged 15–64 years globally, with 3·2 million (1·6–5·1 million) women and 12·5 million (7·5–18·4 million) men. Gender composition varied by location: women were estimated to comprise 30·0% (95% UI 28·5–31·5) of PWID in North America and 33·4% (31·0–35·6) in Australasia, compared with 3·1% (2·1–4·1) in south Asia. Globally, we estimate that 17·8% (10·8–24·8) of PWID are living with HIV, 52·3% (42·4–62·1) are HCV-antibody positive, and 9·0% (5·1–13·2) are HBV surface antigen positive; there is substantial geographic variation in these levels. Globally, we estimate 82·9% (76·6–88·9) of PWID mainly inject opioids and 33·0% (24·3–42·0) mainly inject stimulants. We estimate that 27·9% (20·9–36·8) of PWID globally are younger than 25 years, 21·7% (15·8–27·9) had recently (within the past year) experienced homelessness or unstable housing, and 57·9% (50·5–65·2) had a history of incarceration.InterpretationWe identified evidence of IDU in more countries than ...

Contents Location Opioid dependence Opioid overdose deaths Cases of opioid dependence (1000s) (95%UI) Age-standardised rate per 100,000 (95%UI) Number of opioid deaths (1000s) (95%UI) Age-standardised overdose rate per 100,000 (95%UI)

Executive summary In September 2015, the member states of the United Nations endorsed sustainable development goals (SDG) for 2030 that aspire to human rights-centered approaches to ensuring the health and well-being of all people. The SDGs embody both the UN Charter values of rights and justice for all and the responsibility of states to rely on the best scientific evidence as they seek to better humankind. In April 2016, these same states will consider control of illicit drugs, an area of social policy that has been fraught with controversy, seen as inconsistent with human rights norms, and for which scientific evidence and public health approaches have arguably played too limited a role. The previous UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on drugs in 1998 – convened under the theme “a drug-free world, we can do it!” – endorsed drug control policies based on the goal of prohibiting all use, possession, production, and trafficking of illicit drugs. This goal is enshrined in national law in many countries. In pronouncing drugs a “grave threat to the health and well-being of all mankind,” the 1998 UNGASS echoed the foundational 1961 convention of the international drug control regime, which justified eliminating the “evil” of drugs in the name of “the health and welfare of mankind.” But neither of these international agreements refers to the ways in which pursuing drug prohibition itself might affect public health. The “war on drugs” and “zero-tolerance” policies that grew out of the prohibitionist consensus are now being challenged on multiple fronts, including their health, human rights, and development impact. The Johns Hopkins – Lancet Commission on Drug Policy and Health has sought to examine the emerging scientific evidence on public health issues arising from drug control policy and to inform and encourage a central focus on public health evidence and outcomes in drug policy debates, such as the important deliberations of the 2016 UNGASS on drugs. The Johns Hopkins-Lancet Commission is concerned that drug policies are often colored by ideas about drug use and drug dependence that are not scientifically grounded. The 1998 UNGASS declaration, for example, like the UN drug conventions and many national drug laws, does not distinguish between drug use and drug abuse. A 2015 report by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, by contrast, found it important to emphasize that “[d]rug use is neither a medical condition nor does it necessarily lead to drug dependence.” The idea that all drug use is dangerous and evil has led to enforcement-heavy policies and has made it difficult to see potentially dangerous drugs in the same light as potentially dangerous foods, tobacco, alcohol for which the goal of social policy is to reduce potential harms. Health impact of drug policy based on enforcement of prohibition The pursuit of drug prohibition has generated a parallel economy run by criminal networks. Both these networks, which resort to violence to protect their markets, and the police and sometimes military ...

Despite global reductions in HIV incidence and mortality, the 15 UNAIDS-designated countries of Eastern Europe and Central Asia (EECA) that gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991 constitute the only region where both continue to rise. HIV transmission in EECA is fuelled primarily by injection of opioids, with harsh criminalisation of drug use that has resulted in extraordinarily high levels of incarceration. Consequently, people who inject drugs, including those with HIV, hepatitis C virus, and tuberculosis, are concentrated within prisons. Evidence-based primary and secondary prevention of HIV using opioid agonist therapies such as methadone and buprenorphine is available in prisons in only a handful of EECA countries (methadone or buprenorphine in five countries and needle and syringe programmes in three countries), with none of them meeting recommended coverage levels. Similarly, antiretroviral therapy coverage, especially among people who inject drugs, is markedly under-scaled. Russia completely bans opioid agonist therapies and does not support needle and syringe programmes—with neither available in prisons—despite the country’s high incarceration rate and having the largest burden of people with HIV who inject drugs in the region. Mathematical modelling for Ukraine suggests that high levels of incarceration in EECA countries facilitate HIV transmission among people who inject drugs, with 28–55% of all new HIV infections over the next 15 years predicted to be attributable to heightened HIV transmission risk among currently or previously incarcerated people who inject drugs. Scaling up of opioid agonist therapies within prisons and maintaining treatment after release would yield the greatest HIV transmission reduction in people who inject drugs. Additional analyses also suggest that at least 6% of all incident tuberculosis cases, and 75% of incident tuberculosis cases in people who inject drugs are due to incarceration. Interventions that reduce incarceration itself and effectively intervene with prisoners to screen, diagnose, and treat addiction and HIV, hepatitis C virus, and tuberculosis are urgently needed to stem the multiple overlapping epidemics concentrated in prisons.

Although, globally, 39.2% of people with recent injecting drug use are living with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and 8.5% of all HCV infections occur globally among people with recent injecting drug use, there is wide variation among countries and regions.