BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Currently, HTLV screening is not performed in South Africa (SA). This report describes an economic assessment (budget impact and cost-effectiveness) of implementing different HTLV screening strategies. METHODS: A modified version of the Alliance of Blood Operators risk-based decision-making framework was used to assess the risk and consequences of HTLV in the blood supply in SA. We developed a deterministic model of the cost and consequences of four screening strategies: none, universal, all donors once and first time donors only assuming a transfusion-transmission (TT) efficiency of 10% and a manifestation of clinical disease of 6%. RESULTS: Unscreened blood results in 3·55 symptomatic TT-HTLV cases and a total healthcare cost of Rand (R)3 446 950 (US Dollars (USD)229 800) annually. Universal screening would cost R24 000 000 (USD1 600 000) per annum and prevent 3·54 (99·8%) symptomatic TT-HTLV cases in the first year and 0·55 (98·4%) symptomatic TT-HTLV cases in the second year at a cost per TT-HTLV prevented of R6 780 000 (USD450 000) in year one and R43 254 000 (USD2 890 000) in year two. Screening all donors once would cost R16,200,000 (USD1 080 000) or R4 600 000 (USD306 000) per symptomatic TT-HTLV infection prevented in year one. Total costs decrease to R5 100 000 (USD340 000) in year 2 but the cost per TT-HTLV prevented increases to R10 700 000 (USD713 333). CONCLUSION: This analysis contributed to the decision not to implement HTLV screening as the healthcare budget and particularly the budget for blood transfusion in SA is insufficient to provide appropriate treatment. Arguably, available resources can be more efficiently utilized in other healthcare programs.

Background

An increase in potential HIV elite controllers (EC) and anecdotal reports of antiretroviral therapy (ART) use among South African blood donors led us to verify EC status.

Methods

Stored plasma samples from potential EC were tested for ART drugs. Demographic and temporal associations were examined using multivariable logistic regression.

Results

Of 226 potential EC, 150 (66.4%) had detectable ART with increasing prevalence by year (OR = 7.57 for 2016 vs 2010, 95% confidence interval, 1.96-32.17).

Discussion

False presumptive EC status due to undisclosed ART represents a growing proportion of potential EC donors in South Africa coincident with the country's ART rollout.

Background and objectives

Donated blood is not currently screened for human T-cell lymphotropic virus (HTLV) in South Africa. Several small studies have detected HTLV-1 in South Africa, but prevalence by geographic region or population group is unavailable.

Materials and methods

We performed a large seroprevalence study of South African blood donors during 3 months in 2013. All geographic regions except the Western Cape were included, and Black and Coloured (local term for mixed race) donors were oversampled. Identity-unlinked plasma samples were screened with the Abbott Prism HTLV-1/2 assay, and repeatedly reactive samples were tested by the Inno-LIA HTLV-1/2 Score confirmatory assay. Odds ratios were calculated with multivariable logistic regression.

Results

Of 46 752 donors tested, 133 (0·28%) were initially reactive, 111 (0·24%) repeatedly reactive and 57 (0·12%) confirmed positive for HTLV-1; none were HTLV-2 positive. Prevalence was 0·062% weighted to annual blood donations but highly concentrated in the Black population group (OR = 20·24 CI: 2·77-147·88); higher in females than males (OR = 1·81 CI: 1·06-3·08); and in donors aged >50 years compared to ages 16-19 (OR = 6·4 CI: 2·95-13·86). After controlling for age, sex and population group, there was no difference in prevalence between new and repeat blood donors or among geographic regions within South Africa.

Conclusions

We conclude that HTLV-1 infection is widespread among the Black population of South Africa and its epidemiology is similar to other endemic areas. Because South Africa is increasing its recruitment of Black blood donors, the implications for blood screening require further consideration.