Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases in The Philippines: National Epidemiology Center
Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases in The Philippines: National Epidemiology Center
159 311
to the HIV and AIDS Registry (Table 1). This was a
Asymptomatic Cases 156 305 5,463
22% increase compared to the same period last year
AIDS Cases 3 6 863
(n=130 in 2010) [Figure 1].
Males 144 285 4,984*
Most of the cases (91%) were males. The median age Females 15 26 1,331*
was 28 years (age range:15-56 years). The 20-29 year Youth 15-24yo 44 89 1,302
(52%) age-group had the most number of cases. Fifty- Children <15yo 0 0 55
six percent (89) of the reported cases were from the Reported Deaths due to AIDS 1 1 324
National Capital Region (NCR). *Note: No data available on sex for eleven (11) cases.
Reported mode of transmission was sexual contact Figure 1. Number of New HIV Cases per Month (2008-2011)
(155) and blood transfusion (1). Three did not report 175
[Figure 3].
25
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 143 130 120 154 153 109 131 108 153 104 112 174
Of the 159 HIV positive cases, three were reported as 2011 152 159
AIDS cases. Two were males and one was female. The
median age was 24 years (age range: 22-27 years). All Figure 2. Comparison of the Proportion of Types of Sexual
acquired infection through sexual contact (1 heterosex- Transmission in 2011, 2010 & Cumulative Data (1984-2011)
ual, 1 homosexual, and 1 bisexual). There was one re- 100% Het erosexual
bisexual). F eb 2 0 11 F eb 2 0 10 C umul at i ve
Figure 3. Number of HIV/AIDS Cases Reported in the Philippines by Year, Jan 1984 to February 2011 (N=6,326)
1650
1500
1350
1200
1050
900
750
600
450
300
150
0
'84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
T OT A L 2 10 29 38 32 39 66 85 72 102 118 116 154 117 189 158 123 174 184 193 199 210 309 342 528 835 1591 311
A s y mpt omat i c 0 6 18 25 21 29 48 68 51 64 61 65 104 94 144 80 83 118 140 139 161 171 273 312 506 806 1571 305
A I DS 2 4 11 13 11 10 18 17 21 38 57 51 50 23 45 78 40 56 44 54 38 39 36 30 22 29 20 6
Deat h 2 4 10 12 9 8 15 13 13 11 19 24 27 10 16 17 9 20 11 11 8 16 18 10 *7 1 2 1
*Five initially asymptomatic cases reported in 2008, died due to AIDS that same year. 1
Philippine HIV/AIDS Registry February 2011
AIDS Cases (1984-2011) Fig 4. Proportion of Modes of Transmission of AIDS Cases by Year,
Jan 1984—February 2011
Of the 311 HIV positive cases in 2011, six were reported as
AIDS cases. Eighty-three percent were males. Ages ranged
100%
From 1984 to 2011, there were 863 AIDS cases reported, 71% 50%
contact (275) then bisexual contact (77). Other modes of B l ood T r ans f us i on 10 0 0 0 0
M T CT 16 0 1 0 0
transfusion (10), injecting drug use (4), and needle prick B i s ex ual Cont ac t 60 4 8 4 1
injuries (2) [Figure 4]. Three percent (28) of the AIDS cases Homos ex ual Cont ac t 234 10 14 14 3
did not report mode of HIV transmission. *Note: 28 did not report mode of transmission
15-61 years old (median 28 years). The 20-29 year old age
group (59%) had the most number of cases for 2011. For the 75%
(4,984) were males. Ages ranged from 1-73 years (median 30 25-34y o 75 8 152 12
years). The age groups with the most number of cases were:
15-24y o 41 3 84 5
1-14y o 0 0 0 0
40-44yo
35-39yo
30-34yo
25-29yo
20-24yo
15-19yo
Number of Male Cases <15yo Number of Female Cases
1500 1250 1000 750 500 250 0 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500
<15y o 15-19y o 20-24y o 25-29y o 30-34yo 35-39yo 40-44y o 45-49y o 50 & ol der <15y o 15-19yo 20-24y o 25-29y o 30- 34y o 35-39y o 40-44y o 45- 49y o 50 & ol der
2011 0 6 78 92 60 22 14 6 7 2011 0 0 5 7 5 2 4 2 1
2007 6 1 36 74 54 43 30 15 19 2007 3 0 4 16 12 14 6 5 3
1984-2006 21 14 121 300 360 321 249 170 157 1984-2006 18 33 187 209 190 140 84 30 41
2
Philippine HIV/AIDS Registry February 2011
7].
50
- - - - - - -
available for 6% (384) of the cases. Cumulative data
Mat ernal t o Child
21% (1,173) through bisexual contact. From 2007 Het er osexual Cont act - Male - - - 6 18 8 4
there has been a shift in the predominant trend of Bisexual Cont act - - - 27 56 18 -
70%
Sexual Contact 155 306 5,712
60%
Heterosexual contact 33 (21%) 61 (20%) 2, 546 (45%) 50%
0%
Needle Prick Injury 0 0 3 '84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
Mother-to-Child 0 0 52 1 7 24 24 16 19 35 30 41 47 58 56 81 82 138 114 93 128 129 129 123 131 193 139 160 216 271 61
Het er os ex ual
200
Blood/Blood Products 0 0 10
0
Injecting Drug Use 0 0 1 '84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11*
No Data Available 0 0 48 Non-OFW 1 8 29 35 23 34 56 78 58 73 87 92 119 90 138 91 63 95 88 99 111 116 179 236 406 671 1417 275
% of OFW 50% 20% 0% 8% 28% 13% 15% 8% 19% 28% 26% 21% 23% 23% 27% 42% 49% 45% 52% 49% 44% 45% 42% 31% 23% 20% 11% 12%
From January to February 2011, 152 blood units were confirmed to Table 4. Results of Blood Units Referred for HIV Confirmation
be positive by the RITM.
Monthly Report 2011
For February 2011, out of the 67 blood units referred for HIV Blood units* Positive Indeterminate
confirmation, 15 units were positive for HIV and 50 units were nega- referred
tive for HIV; 2 units had indeterminate result [Table 4]. January 85 11 0
February 67 15 2
Figure 10. HIV Positive Blood Units by Month & Year (2008-2011) March
25 April
May
20 June
July
15
August
September
10
October
5 November
December
0
J an Feb M ar A pr M ay J un Jul A ug Sep Oc t Nov Dec T ot al Total for the year
152 26 2
10 7 4 8 8 2 9 6 7 7 4 2 74
(Jan –Feb only)
2008
2009 5 5 10 10 7 5 7 7 9 12 3 9 89 * One blood donor can donate more than one blood unit.
2010 9 12 15 15 9 17 11 6 10 20 11 11 146 ** These are HIV positive blood units, not donors. Donors of HIV positive blood units
2011 11 15 26 may or may not be in the HIV & AIDS Registry.
The Registry is a passive surveillance system. Except for HIV confirmation by the
NRL, all other data submitted to the Registry are secondary and cannot be veri-
fied. An example would be an individual’s reported place of residence. The
Registry is unable to determine if this reported address is where the person got
infected, or where the person lived after being infected, or where the person is
presently living, or whether the address is valid. This limitation has major implica-
tions to data interpretation. Thus, readers are cautioned to carefully weigh the
data and consider other sources of information prior to arriving at conclusions.