130 likes | 220 Views
MSF Experience on Use of HIV Viral Load testing i n Myanmar. Khin Nyein Chan Medical Coordinator. HIV program in Myanmar. Moe Gaung. Waing Maw. MSF HIV/ART program started since 2003 17 TB/HIV clinics Yangon Region Taninthayi Region Kachin State Shan State Rakhine State
E N D
MSF Experience on Use of HIV Viral Load testing in Myanmar KhinNyein ChanMedical Coordinator
HIV program in Myanmar Moe Gaung Waing Maw • MSF HIV/ART program started since 2003 • 17 TB/HIV clinics • Yangon Region • Taninthayi Region • Kachin State • Shan State • Rakhine State • >30,000 patients are on HAART
Activities • HIV Prevention – focusing on SW, MSM, DU • HIV Care and Support including – HTC, PMTCT, OI management, HAART • Laboratory services • Network of CD4 facility, 1 Cavidi Viral Load system, GeneXpert,Biochemistry, etc.
HIV Viral Load monitoring MSF installed one Cavidi VL system in Yangon – Mid 2009
HIV Viral Load monitoring (Cont.) • Manual Extraction of RT enzyme and amplification • Takes 2 days for one lab tech • Leave overnight for final reading
HIV Viral Load monitoring (Cont.) • Final Reading on the next morning • Takes 5 Minutes only • Results obtained through a computer software • 29 samples per each run
Why Cavidi System? • Very feasible for resource limited settings.. • Does not require sterile environment/molecular laboratory • Allows for decentralised testing • Subtype independent technology • Affordable cost • However, • Technician dependent • Capacity per lab tech: • Collection and Transportation of specimen
Capacity of VL monitoring in MSF • Max. Capacity using 2 full time lab tech: - 3 runs (87) per week – 156 runs (4524) per year • Current patients on MSF Treatment • >29,000patients on first line • Nearly 1000patients on second line • 3 patients on third line
Country Situation • Estimated patients need of ART – 125,000 • Currently on ART - >50,000 • 2 Viral Load facilities – MSF Cavidi system and MoH PCR system • MSF Criteria for VL testing • 1st priority – Clinically and immunologically suspected treatment failure • Yearly monitoring for patients on 2nd line (a rising VL could be targeted with intense adherence counseling)
Transportation of specimen 6Hr Car 2.5Hr Boat 2.5 Hr Air
Viralvs. immunological monitoring • A simple analysis of VL vs CD4 of 3801 patients with suspected immunological failure receiving 1st line ART >1yr shows • 20% (755) - confirmed failure and of those failure, 8% (58) has CD4 >350 • 66% (2505) has undetectable VL and of those 66%, 33%(828) has CD4 <200 11
VL: An essential tool in ART package • VL should be the first routine adherence monitoring tool • Support promoting retention on 1st line ART • Critical role in preventing unnecessary switch to 2nd line regimen