Skip to main content
HHS Author Manuscripts logoLink to HHS Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 May 26.
Published in final edited form as: JAMA. 2014 Jul 23;312(4):432–434. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.8534

Trends in Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States, 2002-2011

Anna Satcher Johnson 1, H Irene Hall 1, Xiaohong Hu 1, Amy Lansky 1, David R Holtgrave 1, Jonathan Mermin 1
PMCID: PMC7249228  NIHMSID: NIHMS1585521  PMID: 25038362

Abstract

There has been increasing emphasis on care and treatment for persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in the United States during the past decade,1,2 including the use of antiretroviral therapy for increasing survival and decreasing transmission.1 Accurate HIV diagnosis data recently became available for all states,3 allowing for the first time an examination of long-term national trends. These data can be used to monitor awareness of serostatus among persons living with HIV, primary prevention efforts, and testing initiatives. We examined trends in HIV diagnoses from 2002–2011 in the United States using data from the National HIV Surveillance System of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Methods |

To assess trends in HIV diagnoses, we analyzed cases of HIV infection diagnosed during 2002–2011 among persons aged 13 years or older reported through December 2012. All data were collected through routine HIV surveillance mandated by laws or regulations in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Ethical review for this data collection is waived.

Data on race/ethnicity were identified by health department personnel conducting active surveillance and reviewing medical records. Multiple imputation was used to assign transmission category to cases reported without an identified risk factor (124 447; 25.2%).3 Population denominators for calculating rates were obtained from the US Census Bureau.

We estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) in HIV diagnosis rates by using Poisson regression with no covariates4; logarithms of rate denominators served as offsets. Case counts (rather than rates) were used to analyze diagnoses by transmission category due to lack of population denominators. The significance of a trend was determined by whether the 95% confidence interval for the EAPC included 0. Data were analyzed using SAS version 9.3 (SAS Institute Inc).

Results |

During2002–2011,493 372personswerediagnosedwith HIV in the United States. The annual diagnosis rate decreased by 33.2% (EAPC = −4.0%; 95% CI, −4.1 to −3.9) from 24.1 per 100 000 population in 2002 to 16.1 in 2011 (Table 1). Statistically significant decreases in the EAPC of diagnosis rates were found in nearly every demographic population with the largest changes observed in women, persons aged 35–44 years, and persons of multiple races. Changes were not evident for Asians or Native Hawaiians/other Pacific Islanders.

Table 1.

Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Diagnoses Among Persons Aged 13 Years or Older in the United States

HIV Diagnosis Rate/100 000 Population by Year of Diagnosis % Change EAPC (95% CI)
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Sex
 Male 35.8 33.5 33.2 31.4 31.2 31.5 30.3 28.4 26.9 26.1 −27.1 −3.1 (−3.2 to −3.0)
 Female 13.0 11.7 11.2 10.3 10.1 9.9 9.2 8.1 7.2 6.6 −49.2 −6.6 (−6.8 to −6.4)
Age group, y
 13–24 12.5 12.4 13.2 13.6 14.8 16.1 17.3 17.5 17.6 17.3 38.4 4.6 (4.4 to 4.9)
 25–34 39.8 36.0 35.5 33.5 32.6 32.9 31.8 29.5 28.5 27.8 −30.2 −3.6 (−3.7 to −3.4)
 35–44 46.2 42.7 41.2 37.6 36.6 34.8 31.3 28.0 25.0 22.9 −50.4 −7.1 (−7.3 to −7.0)
 45–54 25.9 24.7 23.9 23.0 22.9 23.2 22.0 19.8 18.3 17.8 −31.3 −3.8 (−4.0 to −3.6)
 ≥55 6.2 5.9 6.2 5.8 5.7 6.0 5.9 5.3 5.0 4.8 −22.6 −2.5 (−2.8 to −2.1)
Race/ethnicitya
 American Indian/Alaska Native 12.9 12.5 11.7 11.7 10.5 10.7 11.3 10.2 11.3 10.0 −22.5 −2.3 (−3.8 to −0.8)
 Asian 6.2 6.3 6.5 6.0 6.3 7.2 7.0 6.4 5.8 6.4 3.2 0.1 (−0.7 to 1.0)
 Black 99.4 90.9 89.1 81.7 80.3 80.1 79.0 71.6 66.7 62.6 −37.0 −4.4 (−4.6 to −4.3)
 Hispanicb 37.5 34.3 31.9 30.0 30.3 29.7 27.3 25.5 22.6 22.0 −41.3 −5.4 (−5.6 to −5.2)
 Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander 16.1 26.7 20.4 20.8 26.3 21.3 22.0 21.8 14.3 16.7 3.7 −2.6 (−5.0 to −0.1)
 White 10.1 9.5 9.4 9.0 8.8 8.8 8.1 7.5 7.2 6.9 −31.7 −4.0 (−4.1 to −3.8)
 Multiple races 52.5 43.1 45.8 47.5 39.4 42.1 38.1 33.2 25.7 22.5 −57.1 −7.7 (−8.3 to −7.1)
Total 24.1 22.3 21.9 20.6 20.4 20.4 19.6 18.0 16.8 16.1 −33.2 −4.0 (−4.1 to −3.9)
No. of HIV Diagnoses by Transmission Category and Year of Diagnosisc
Males
 MTM sexual contact 26 021 25 251 26 240 25 838 26 313 27 614 27 466 26 685 26 035 26 033 0 0.3 (0.1 to 0.5)
 Injection drug use 6004 5199 4592 4064 3860 3424 2937 2436 2102 1795 −70.1 −11.8 (−12.5 to −11.1)
  Both of the above 2850 2587 2473 2320 2085 1956 1732 1513 1397 1211 −57.5 −8.6 (−9.4 to −7.8)
 Heterosexual contactd 5980 5628 5546 5040 5187 5266 5043 4508 4123 3910 −34.6 −4.0 (−4.6 to −3.5)
 Othere 155 118 107 83 79 52 60 39 37 31 −80.0 −16.3 (−23.0 to −9.0)
 Subtotal 41 010 38 783 38 958 37 345 37 524 38 313 37 238 35 181 33 694 32 980 −27.1 −3.1 (−3.2 to −3.0)
Females
 Injection drug use 3892 3324 3060 2666 2443 2215 1981 1658 1358 1218 −68.7 −11.5 (−12.4 to −10.6)
 Heterosexual contactd 11 695 10 896 10 651 10 094 10 169 10 262 9836 8755 8094 7507 −35.8 −4.1 (−4.4 to −3.8)
 Othere 119 103 89 73 58 42 32 22 17 15 −87.4 −20.4 (−28.4 to −11.6)
 Subtotal 15 705 14 323 13 800 12 834 12 670 12 519 11 850 10 435 9470 8740 −49.2 −6.6 (−6.8 to −6.4)
Total 56 715 53 106 52 758 50 179 50 194 50 832 49 088 45 616 43 164 41 720 −33.2 −4.0 (−4.1 to 3.9)

Abbreviations: EAPC, estimated annual percentage change; MTM, male-to-male.

a

Definitions based on standards for the classification of federal data from the US Office of Management and Budget.

b

Can be of any race.

c

Rates not provided due to lack of denominator data for risk populations from the US Census Bureau.

d

Indicates contact with a person known to have, or to be at high risk for, HIVinfection.

e

Includes hemophilia, blood transfusion, perinatal exposure, and risk factor not reported or not identified.

From 2002–2011, the annual number of HIV diagnoses decreased in persons with infection attributed to injection drug use or to heterosexual contact (Table 1). Diagnoses attributed to male-to-male sexual contact remained stable overall, increasing among males aged 13–24, 45–54, and 55 years or older, and decreasing among males aged 35–44 years (Table 2). The largest change (132.5%; EAPC = 10.5) was observed among males aged 13–24 years.

Table 2.

Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Diagnoses Among Males With Infection Attributed to Male-to-Male Sexual Contact

No. of HIV Diagnoses Among Males With Infection Attributed to Male-to-Male Sexual Contact by Year of Diagnosisa % Change EAPC (95% CI)
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Age group, y
 13–24 2976 3207 3748 4107 4690 5449 6208 6528 6912 6919 132.5 10.5 (10.1 to 10.9)
 25–34 7957 7474 7657 7506 7379 7867 7868 7854 7738 7929 −0.4 0.3 (0 to 0.6)
 35–44 9782 9296 9284 8642 8563 8125 7264 6537 5824 5417 −44.6 −6.2 (−6.5 to −5.8)
 45–54 3936 3933 4090 4145 4217 4564 4471 4185 4040 4145 5.3 0.6 (0.1 to 1.1)
 ≥55 1370 1342 1462 1439 1465 1609 1655 1581 1521 1623 18.5 2.0 (1.0 to 3.0)
Total 26 021 25 251 26 240 25 838 26 313 27 614 27 466 26 685 26 035 26 033 0 0.3 (0.1 to 0.5)

Abbreviation: EAPC, estimated annual percentage change.

a

The number of HIV diagnoses resulted from statistical adjustment that accounted for missing transmission category.

Discussion |

Nationally, the annual HIV diagnosis rate decreased more than 30% in the past decade. Declines were observed in several key populations; however, increases were found among certain age groups of men who have sex with men, especially young men. Because of delays in diagnosis, temporal trends in diagnoses and variations among groups may reflect earlier changes in HIV incidence.

This study is limited in that trends in diagnoses can be influenced by changes in testing patterns. The HIV testing services were expanded during the analysis period and early outcomes of testing initiatives often indicate increases in diagnoses until some level of testing saturation occurs. Our study found overall decreases in annual diagnosis rates despite the implementation of testing initiatives during the period of analysis. Although increases in diagnoses were found in young men who have sex with men, reports show that many at high risk do not test annually and the overall percentage of youth who had ever tested for HIV during the period of analysis was low compared with other age groups.5,6

Among men who have sex with men, unprotected risk behaviors in the presence of high prevalence and unsuppressed viral load may continue to drive HIV transmission.6 Disparities in rates of HIV among young men who have sex with men present prevention challenges and warrant expanded efforts.

Funding/Support:

The CDC provides funds to all states and the District of Columbia to conduct the HIV surveillance data used in this study.

Footnotes

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: The authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Dr Holtgrave reported that Johns Hopkins University received grant support from Johnson & Johnson and the Female Health Company outside of the scope of this article. No other disclosures were reported.

Role of the Sponsor: The CDC had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Publisher's Disclaimer: Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the CDC.

References

  • 1.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); Health Resources and Services Administration; National Institutes of Health; HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Incorporating HIV prevention into the medical care of persons living with HIV. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2003; 52(RR-12):1–24. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Vital signs: HIV prevention through care and treatment—United States. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011;60(47):1618–1623. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Monitoring selected national HIV prevention and care objectives by using HIV surveillance data—United States and 6 dependent areas—2011. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/2011_monitoring_hiv_indicators_hssr_final.pdf. Accessibility verified June 24, 2014.
  • 4.Ries LAG, Eisner MP, Kosary CL, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1973–1999, 2002. http://www.seer.cancer.gov/archive/csr/1973_1999/overview.pdf. Accessibility verified June 24, 2014.
  • 5.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). HIV testing and risk behaviors among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men—United States. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2013;62(47):958–962. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Vital signs: HIV infection, testing, and risk behaviors among youths—United States. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2012;61(47):971–976. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES