The Optimal Age for Screening Adolescents and Young Adults Without Identified Risk Factors for HIV.

PURPOSE: To assess the optimal age at which a one-time HIV screen should begin for adolescents and young adults (AYA) in the U.S. without identified HIV risk factors, incorporating clinical impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS: We simulated HIV-uninfected 12-year-olds in the U.S. without identified risk factors who faced age-specific risks of HIV infection (.6-71.3/100,000PY). We modeled a one-time screen ($36) at age 15, 18, 21, 25, or 30, each in addition to current U.S. screening practices (30% screened by age 24). Outcomes included retention in care, virologic suppression, life expectancy, lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in $/year-of-life saved (YLS) from the health-care system perspective. In sensitivity analyses, we varied HIV incidence, screening and linkage rates, and costs.

RESULTS: All one-time screens detected a small proportion of lifetime infections (.1%-10.3%). Compared with current U.S. screening practices, a screen at age 25 led to the most favorable care continuum outcomes at age 25: proportion diagnosed (77% vs. 51%), linked to care (71% vs. 51%), retained in care (68% vs. 44%), and virologically suppressed (49% vs. 32%). Compared with the next most effective screen, a screen at age 25 provided the greatest clinical benefit, and was cost-effective ($96,000/YLS) by U.S. standards (<$100,000/YLS).

CONCLUSIONS: For U.S. AYA without identified risk factors, a one-time routine HIV screen at age 25, after the peak of incidence, would optimize clinical outcomes and be cost-effective compared with current U.S. screening practices. Focusing screening on AYA ages 18 or younger is a less efficient use of a one-time screen among AYA than screening at a later age.