You are on page 1of 28
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
The HIV Epidemic in Alameda County Neena Murgai, Ph.D., MPH Deputy Director, Epidemiology and Surveillance Collaborative
The HIV Epidemic in
Alameda County
Neena Murgai, Ph.D., MPH
Deputy Director, Epidemiology and Surveillance
Collaborative Community Planning Council Meeting
July 18 th , 2012
Outline of Presentation Newly Diagnosed HIV cases  Demographic characteristics  Case rates by demographic groups
Outline of Presentation
Newly Diagnosed HIV cases
Demographic characteristics
Case rates by demographic groups
Trends in rates, overall and by demographic and risk
groups
Geographic distribution
Persons Living with HIV/AIDS
Demographic characteristics
Demographic characteristics by each mode of
transmission
Geographic distribution
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Considerations in Interpreting Surveillance Data Data likely underestimate true burden of HIV because:  Estimates of
Considerations in Interpreting Surveillance Data
Data likely underestimate true burden of HIV
because:
Estimates of new dia gnoses of HIV infection are subject to
reporting delays
Data only include persons who have been tested/diagnosed
and reported to the health department
HIV-infected persons who are unaware of their
diagnosis/infection are not included
Data are limited for certain groups, e.g. youth,
transgendered persons, because of small counts or
current reporting methods
Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases, Newly Diagnosed AIDS Cases, Deaths and Persons Living With HIV/AIDS, Alameda County
Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases, Newly Diagnosed AIDS
Cases, Deaths and Persons Living With HIV/AIDS,
Alameda County 2006-2011
Indicator
2006
2007 2008
2009
2010 2011*
Number newly
diagnosed HIV cases
(with or without AIDS)
624
233
281
203
247
213 164
Number newly
diagnosed AIDS cases
225
238
169
143
80
65
Number deaths
94
90 87
95
50
22
Number of persons
living with HIV/AIDS
(PLWHA) 4,111 4,302 4,418 4,570 4,733 4,875
Note: * Data in 2011 are subject to reporting delays and should be considered preliminary
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Data to Inform Prevention Priorities: New HIV Cases  Impact of new HIV diagnoses among groups-
Data to Inform Prevention Priorities: New HIV Cases
Impact of new HIV diagnoses among groups- by
sex, race/ethnicity, age, mode of transmission
Comparison of burden among demographic
groups (case rates)
How HIV diagnoses have impacted these groups
over time (trends)
Concentration of new HIV diagnoses by city and
region
Comparison of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases and Alameda County Residents by Sex Newly Diagnosed HIV Alameda
Comparison of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases and Alameda
County Residents by Sex
Newly Diagnosed HIV
Alameda County 2010
Cases 2009-2011(n=
624)
(n=1,514,654)
1%
16%
Male
49%
Male
Female
51%
Female
MTF
83%
Note: Data include persons diagnosed with HIV regardless of stage of disease (i.e., with or
without AIDS)
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Comparison of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases and Alameda County Residents by Race/Ethnicity Newly Diagnosed HIV Alameda
Comparison of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases and Alameda
County Residents by Race/Ethnicity
Newly Diagnosed HIV
Alameda County 2010
Cases 2009-2011(n=
624)
(n=1,514,654)
4%
2%
10%
White
25%
White
34%
27%
AfrAmer
AfrAmer
19%
Latino
Latino
API
API
Other/Unk
Other/Unk
12%
23%
44%
Note: Data include persons diagnosed with HIV regardless of stage of disease (i.e., with or
without AIDS)
Comparison of Newly Diagnosed Male HIV Cases to Alameda County by Race/Ethnicity Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases
Comparison of Newly Diagnosed Male HIV Cases to
Alameda County by Race/Ethnicity
Newly Diagnosed HIV
Cases 2009-2011 (n=526)
Alameda County Males
(n=742,287)
2%
5%
10%
White
White
27%
34%
26%
AfrAmer
AfrAmer
20%
Latino
Latino
API
API
Other/Unk
Other/Unk
12%
23%
41%
Note: Data include persons diagnosed with HIV regardless of stage of disease (i.e., with or
without AIDS)
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Comparison of Newly Diagnosed Female HIV Cases to Alameda County by Race/Ethnicity Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases
Comparison of Newly Diagnosed Female HIV Cases to
Alameda County by Race/Ethnicity
Newly Diagnosed HIV
Cases 2009-2011 (n=98)
Alameda County Females
(n=771,967)
5%
8%
17%
White
White
15%
33%
27%
AfrAmer
AfrAmer
Latino
Latino
API
API
Other/Unk
Other/Unk
13%
60%
22%
Note: Data include persons diagnosed with HIV regardless of stage of disease (i.e., with or
without AIDS)
Comparison of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases and Alameda County Residents by Age Group Newly Diagnosed HIV
Comparison of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases and Alameda
County Residents by Age Group
Newly Diagnosed HIV
Alameda County 2010
Cases 2009-2011(n=
624)
(n=1,514,654)
4%
16%
19%
0‐12 yrs
0‐12 yrs
30%
24%
13‐19 yrs
13‐19 yrs
9%
20‐29 yrs
20‐29 yrs
30‐49 yrs
30‐49 yrs
15%
50+ yrs
50+
53%
30%
Note: Data include persons diagnosed with HIV regardless of stage of disease (i.e., with or
without AIDS)
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Newly Diagnosed Male and Female HIV Cases by Mode of Transmission, Alameda County 2009-2011 Male (n=526)
Newly Diagnosed Male and Female HIV Cases by Mode of
Transmission, Alameda County 2009-2011
Male (n=526)
Female (n=98)
4%
6%
11.2%
7%
IDU
10%
36.7%
Hetero
IDU
Other
Hetero
MSM
Other
MSM & IDU
52.0%
73%
Note: Data include persons diagnosed with HIV regardless of stage of disease (i.e., with or
without AIDS)
Annual Average Rates of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Selected Characteristics, Alameda County 2009-2011 Three Year
Annual Average Rates of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by
Selected Characteristics, Alameda County 2009-2011
Three Year Average
Number
Three Year Average
Rate per 100,000
TOTAL
208 13.7
SEX
Male
173
23.3
5X
Female
33 4.2
RACE/ETHNICITY
White
53
10.3
5X
AfrAmer
91
49.5
Latino
40
11.6
API
20
5.0
Other/Unk
3
5.5
Note: * Data in 2011 are subject to reporting delays and should be considered preliminary
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Average Annual Rates of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Sex, Alameda County 2009-2011 25 23.3 20
Average Annual Rates of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by
Sex, Alameda County 2009-2011
25
23.3
20
15
13.7
~5X
10
4.2
5
0
Total
Male
Female
Sex
Rates per 100,000
Average Annual Rates of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2009-2011 60 49.5 50
Average Annual Rates of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by
Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2009-2011
60
49.5
50
40
~5X
~5X
30
20
13.7
11.6
10.3
10
5.0
5.5
0
Total
White
AfrAmer
Latino
API
Other/Unk
Race/Ethnicity
Rates per 100,000
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Average Annual Rates of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2009-2011 60 49.5 50
Average Annual Rates of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by
Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2009-2011
60
49.5
50
40
30
20
13.7
1X
11.6
10.3
10
5.0
5.5
0
Total
White
AfrAmer
Latino
API
Other/Unk
Race/Ethnicity
Average Annual Rates of Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by
Age Group, Alameda County 2009-2011
30
24 1
.
24.0
25
23.2
1X
20
14.7
15
13.7
10
5.8
5
3.6
0
Total
13‐19 yrs
20‐29 yrs
30‐39 yrs
40‐49 yrs
50‐59 yrs 60 yrs & over
Age Group
Rates per 100,000
Rates per 100,000
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Summary Findings: Characteristics of New HIV Cases  New HIV diagnoses in Alameda County are predominantly
Summary Findings: Characteristics of New HIV Cases
New HIV diagnoses in Alameda County are
predominantly among males, African Americans, and MSM
Over 60% of HIV diagnoses among women are among
African Americans; about half of new HIV diagnoses
among women are attributed to heterosexual contact
The burden of new HIV diagnoses among males is 5 times
that for females
African Americans bear 5 times the burden of new HIV
diagnoses compared to W hites or Latinos
Adults 20-49 years old have the greatest burden of new HIV
diagnoses
Trends: Changes in HIV Diagnoses Over Time  Trends in rates can be variable due to
Trends: Changes in HIV Diagnoses Over Time
Trends in rates can be variable due to small
number o
f
cases, espec a y n sma er subgroups
i
ll
i
ll
Three years of data were combined to calculate
average annual case rates for greater reliability
Apparent changes in rates over time (decline or
increase) may not be statistically significant
because of variability despite using this approach
Trends do highlight the impact of HIV among
different groups over the course of the epidemic
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Sex, Alameda County 2006-2011 30 25 20 15 Female
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Sex, Alameda
County 2006-2011
30
25
20
15
Female
Male
10
All
5
0
Rate per 100,000
2006‐08
2007‐09
2008‐10
2009‐11
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2006-2011 70 60 50 40 AfrAmer
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Race/Ethnicity,
Alameda County 2006-2011
70
60
50
40
AfrAmer
API
30
Latino
White
20
All
10
0
Rate per 100,000
2006‐08
2007‐09
2008‐10
2009‐11
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Trends Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Age Group, Alameda County 2006-2011 35 30 25 20 15
Trends Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Age Group,
Alameda County 2006-2011
35
30
25
20
15
10
13‐19 yrs
20‐29 yrs
30‐39 yrs
40‐49 yrs
50‐59 yrs
60 & over
5
All
0
Rate per 100,000
2006‐08
2007‐09
2008‐10
2009‐11
Geographic Definitions: Region by Cities  North County: Albany, Berkeley  Oakland Area: Oakland, Emeryville, Piedmont,
Geographic Definitions: Region by Cities
North County: Albany, Berkeley
Oakland Area: Oakland, Emeryville, Piedmont, Alameda
Central County: San Leandro, San Lorenzo, Ashland,
Cherryland, Fairview, Castro Valley, Hayward
South County: Union City, Fremont, Newark, Sunol
Tri-Valley: Livermore, Dublin, Pleasanton
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
HIV Cases (2006-2011) by City and Region (n=1299) City Region OAKLAND ALAMEDA Oakland Area EMERYVILLE PIEDMONT
HIV Cases (2006-2011) by City and Region (n=1299)
City
Region
OAKLAND
ALAMEDA
Oakland Area
EMERYVILLE
PIEDMONT
Central
HAYWARD
SAN LEANDRO
County
CASTRO VALLEY
Tri‐Valley
SAN LORENZO
North County
South County
FREMONT
South County
UNION CITY
NEWARK
Central County
North County
BERKELEY
Oakland Area
ALBANY
LIVERMORE
Tri‐Valley
DUBLIN
PLEASANTON
0
200
400
600
800
0
500 1000
Summary Findings: Trends and Geographic Concentration  Between 2006 and 2011 HIV case rates remained stable
Summary Findings: Trends and Geographic Concentration
Between 2006 and 2011 HIV case rates remained stable
among males and females
There was an slight decline in case rates among African
Americans in recent years; however this apparent decline is
not statistically significant
Among 20-49 year olds, case rates declined slightly in the
last 3 years
New cases of HIV are predominantly in the Oakland and
Central County areas and most concentrated in the cities of
Oakland, Hayward, San Leandro, and Berkeley.
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
AIDS Cases, Deaths and Persons Living with AIDS (PLWA) by Calendar Year, Alameda County 1980-2011 4,000
AIDS Cases, Deaths and Persons Living with AIDS (PLWA)
by Calendar Year, Alameda County 1980-2011
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
HAART
ART
1,000
500
0
Calendar Year
AIDS cases diagnosed
Deaths
PLWA
Number
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Data to Inform Priorities in Care and Services: PLWHA  Proportions of PLWHA by demographics and
Data to Inform Priorities in Care and Services: PLWHA
Proportions of PLWHA by demographics and
mode of transmission can highlight priority
populations for HIV care and services
Demographic composition by mode can further
highlight important target populations
Geographic location/concentration of PLWHA in
the county can help identify areas of need and
gaps in access to HIV care and services
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
PLWHA Males and Females by Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2011 Males (n=3969) Females (n=906) 4% 3% 4%
PLWHA Males and Females by Race/Ethnicity, Alameda
County 2011
Males (n=3969)
Females (n=906)
4% 3%
4% 3%
15%
White
12%
White
17%
36%
AfrAmer
AfrAmer
Latino
Latino
API
API
Other/Unk
Other/Unk
40%
66%
PLWHA Male and Females by Age Group, Alameda County 2011 Males (n=3969) Females (n=906) 0.2% 0.3%
PLWHA Male and Females by Age Group, Alameda County
2011
Males (n=3969)
Females (n=906)
0.2% 0.3%
1% 1%
6%
6%
0‐12 yrs
0‐12 yrs
40%
13‐19 yrs
13‐19 yrs
49%
20‐29 yrs
20‐29 yrs
45%
30‐49 yrs
30‐49 yrs
52%
50+
50+
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
PLWHA Males and Females by Mode of Transmission, Alameda County 2011 Males (n=3969) Females (n=906) 4%
PLWHA Males and Females by Mode of Transmission,
Alameda County 2011
Males (n=3969)
Females (n=906)
4%
14%
10%
6%
MSM
20%
IDU
IDU
7%
MSM & IDU
Hetero Contact
Hetero Contact
Other
72%
Other
66%
PLWHA: MSM by Age Group and Race/Ethnicity (n=2866) Alameda County 2011 Age Group Race/Ethnicity 0.2% 4%
PLWHA: MSM by Age Group and Race/Ethnicity (n=2866)
Alameda County 2011
Age Group
Race/Ethnicity
0.2%
4% 3%
7%
0‐12 yrs
White
18%
13‐19 yrs
40%
AfrAmer
48%
20‐29 yrs
Latino
30‐49
API
45%
50+
Other/Unk
35%
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
PLWHA: Heterosexual Males and Females by Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2011 Heterosexual Males (n=397) Heterosexual Females (597)
PLWHA: Heterosexual Males and Females by
Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2011
Heterosexual Males (n=397)
Heterosexual Females (597)
4% 3%
4% 4%
15%
13%
White
White
14%
17%
AfrAmer
AfrAmer
Latino
Latino
API
API
Other/Unk
Other/Unk
60%
66%
PLWHA: Heterosexual Males and Females by Age Group, Alameda County 2011 Heterosexual Males (n=397) Heterosexual Females
PLWHA: Heterosexual Males and Females by Age Group,
Alameda County 2011
Heterosexual Males (n=397)
Heterosexual Females (597)
2%
0.3%
6%
0‐12 yrs
0‐12 yrs
37%
13‐19 yrs
13‐19 yrs
46%
20‐29 yrs
20‐29 yrs
52%
30‐49 yrs
30‐49 yrs
57%
50+
50+
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Transgendered PLWHA by Select Characteristics, Alameda County 2011 (n=51) Gender Race/Ethnicity 60 49 50 2% 2%
Transgendered PLWHA by Select Characteristics, Alameda
County 2011 (n=51)
Gender
Race/Ethnicity
60
49
50
2% 2%
4%
40
18%
White
AfrAmer
30
Latino
API
20
Other/Unk
74%
10
2
0
(FM)Female to Male (MF)Male to Female
Transgendered PLWHA by Select Characteristics, Alameda County 2011 (n=51) Age Group Mode of Transmission 25 20
Transgendered PLWHA by Select Characteristics, Alameda
County 2011 (n=51)
Age Group
Mode of Transmission
25
20
20
2%
15
16%
MSM
13
2%
IDU
10
MSM & IDU
8
7
Hetero Contact
80%
Other/Unk
5
3
0
0‐12 13‐19 20‐29 30‐39 40‐49 50‐59 60 &
yrs
yrs
yrs
yrs
yrs
yrs over
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
PLWH/A by Sex, Alameda County 2011 4,500 4 , 000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 PLWA (n=3441)
PLWH/A by Sex, Alameda County 2011
4,500
4
, 000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
PLWA (n=3441)
1,500
PLWH (n=1434)
1,000
500
0
Male
Female
Sex
Number
PLWH/A by Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2011 2,500 2,000 1,500 PLWA (n=3441) 1,000 PLWH (n=1434) 500 0
PLWH/A by Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2011
2,500
2,000
1,500
PLWA (n=3441)
1,000
PLWH (n=1434)
500
0
White
AfrAmer
Latino
API
Other/Unk
Race/Ethnicity
Number
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
PLWH/A by Age Group, Alameda County 2011 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 PLWA (n=3441) PLWH
PLWH/A by Age Group, Alameda County 2011
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
PLWA (n=3441)
PLWH (n=1434)
600
400
200
0
0‐12 yrs 13‐19 yrs 20‐29 yrs 30‐39 yrs 40‐49 yrs 50‐59 yrs 60 & over
Age
Number
Female PLWH/A by Mode of Transmission, Alameda County 2011 700 600 500 400 300 PLWA (n=3441)
Female PLWH/A by Mode of Transmission, Alameda
County 2011
700
600
500
400
300
PLWA (n=3441)
PLWH (n=1434)
200
100
0
Hetero Contact
IDU
Other/Unk
Mode of Transmission
Number
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Male PLWH/A by Mode of Transmission, Alameda County 2011 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 PLWA (n=3441)
Male PLWH/A by Mode of Transmission, Alameda County
2011
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
PLWA (n=3441)
1,000
PLWH (n=1434)
500
0
MSM
Hetero
IDU
MSM & IDU Other/Unk
Contact
Mode of Transmission
Number
PLWHA by City and Region, Alameda County 2011 (n=4875) City Region OAKLAND ALAMEDA Oakland Area EMERYVILLE
PLWHA by City and Region, Alameda County 2011
(n=4875)
City
Region
OAKLAND
ALAMEDA
Oakland Area
EMERYVILLE
PIEDMONT
HAYWARD
Central County
SAN LEANDRO
CASTRO VALLEY
Tri‐Valley Area
SAN LORENZO
ASHLAND
South County
North County
North County
BERKELEY
ALBANY
Central County
FREMONT
South County
Oakland Area
UNION CITY
SUNOL
LIVERMORE
Tri‐Valley Area
DUBLIN
PLEASANTON
0
1000
2000
3000
0
2000
4000
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Summary Findings: PLWHA Characteristics  African Americans and Whites make up similar proportions of male PLWHA;
Summary Findings: PLWHA Characteristics
African Americans and Whites make up similar proportions
of male PLWHA; among women African Americans
comprise two-thirds of PLWHA
MSM is the most common mode of transmission among
males; heterosexual contact is the most common mode
among females
Most PLWHA who are MSM are 30 years and older
African Americans and Whites comprise a similar
proportion of MSM, but Latinos comprise a much lower
proportion
Transgender PLWHA are predominantly male-to-female,
African American and MSM
Acknowledgements Epidemiology Team Elaine Bautista – Epidemiologist Kate Buchacz – Epidemiologist (CDC Assignee) Ross Fineman –
Acknowledgements
Epidemiology Team
Elaine Bautista – Epidemiologist
Kate Buchacz – Epidemiologist (CDC Assignee)
Ross Fineman – Epidemiology Intern
Alex Marr – Epidemiologist
Surveillance Staff
George Banks – Public Health Investigator
Karen Francisco – Public Health Investigator
Maly Sok – Surveillance Clerk
David Tucker – Public Health Investigator
Information Systems Staff
Wei Chen – Information Systems Analyst
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Appendix A New HIV Cases: Trends
Appendix A
New HIV Cases: Trends
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases: Race/Ethnic Disparities Among Males and Females, Alameda County 2006-2011 Male
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases: Race/Ethnic Disparities
Among Males and Females, Alameda County 2006-2011
Male (n= 1078)
Female (n= 263)
100
45
90
40
80
35
70
30
60
AfrAmer
25
AfrAmer
50
API
20
Latino
40
Latino
15
White
30
White
10
All Female
20
All Male
10
5
0
0
Rate per 100,000
2006‐08
2007‐09
2008‐10
2009‐11
Rate per 100,000
2006‐08
2007‐09
2008‐10
2009‐11
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases Among Males and Females by Age Group, Alameda County 2006-2011
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases Among Males and
Females by Age Group, Alameda County 2006-2011
Male (n= 1078)
Female (n= 263)
50
50
45
45
40
40
35
35
13‐19 yrs
30
30
20‐29 yrs
20‐29 yrs
25
25
30‐39 yrs
30‐39 yrs
20
20
40‐49 yrs
40‐49 yrs
15
15
50‐59 yrs
50‐59 yrs
10
10
60
& over
All Female
5
5
All Male
0
0
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases Among African
American Males and Females by Age Group, Alameda
County 2006-2011
African American Males
African American Females
(n=438)
(n=177)
200
200
180
180
160
160
140
13‐19 yrs
140
120
20‐29 yrs
120
20‐29 yrs
100
100
30‐39 yrs
80
30‐39 yrs
80
40‐49 yrs
60
40‐49 yrs
60
50‐59 yrs
40
All Female
40
60
& over
20
20
All Male
0
0
Rate per 100,000
Rate per 100,000
2006‐08
2006‐08
2007‐09
2007‐09
2008‐10
2008‐10
2009‐11
2009‐11
Rate per 100,000
Rate per 100,000
2006‐08
2006‐08
2007‐09
2007‐09
2008‐10
2008‐10
2009‐11
2009‐11
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Summary Findings: Selected Trends in Case Rates  Between 2006 and 2011 there was a decline
Summary Findings: Selected Trends in Case Rates
Between 2006 and 2011 there was a decline in case rates
among African American females; this decline was not
statistically significant
Among African Americans 20-49 year old, case rates have
been variable among males in this time period; among
females, rates have declined slightly
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Mode of Transmission, Alameda County 2006-2011 Male (n=1078) Female
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases by Mode of
Transmission, Alameda County 2006-2011
Male (n=1078)
Female (n=263)
80%
80%
MSM (n=793)
70%
70%
60%
60%
IDU (n=53)
IDU (n=38)
50%
50%
40%
40%
MSM & IDU
Hetero
30%
(n=54)
30%
Contact
(n=164)
20%
20%
Hetero
Other (n=61)
10%
Contact
10%
(n=100)
0%
0%
Other (n=78)
Percentage
2006‐08
2007‐09
2008‐10
2009‐11
Percentage
2006‐08
2007‐09
2008‐10
2009‐11
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases Among MSM by Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2006-2011 (n=793) 40% 35%
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases Among MSM by
Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2006-2011 (n=793)
40%
35%
30%
25%
AfrAmer
20%
API
Latino
15%
White
10%
Other/Unk
5%
0%
Percentage
2006‐08
2007‐09
2008‐10
2009‐11
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases Among MSM by Age Group, Alameda County 2006-2011 (n=793) 35%
Trends in Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases Among MSM by
Age Group, Alameda County 2006-2011 (n=793)
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
13‐19 yrs
20‐29 yrs
30‐39 yrs
40‐49 yrs
50‐59 yrs
60 & over
5%
0%
Percentage
2006‐08
2007‐09
2008‐10
2009‐11
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
Summary Findings: Trends by Mode  Between 2006 and 20011, for new HIV cases, MSM was
Summary Findings: Trends by Mode
Between 2006 and 20011, for new HIV cases, MSM was the
predominant mode of transmission among males; among
females the predominant mode was heterosexual contact
Among MSM, African Americans and Whites comprised
the highest proportion of new HIV cases in this period
The 20-49 year age groups made up the highest proportions
of new HIV cases in this period
Appendix B PLWHA by Modes of Transmission
Appendix B
PLWHA by Modes of Transmission
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
PLWHA: MSM & IDU by Age Group and Race/Ethnicity (n=257) Alameda County 2011 Age Group Race/Ethnicity
PLWHA: MSM & IDU by Age Group and Race/Ethnicity
(n=257) Alameda County 2011
Age Group
Race/Ethnicity
4%
1% 3%
14%
0‐12 yrs
White
13‐19 yrs
AfrAmer
49%
48%
20‐29 yrs
Latino
47%
30‐49
API
34%
50+
Other/Unk
PLWHA: IDU Males and Females by Race/Ethnicity, Alameda County 2011 IDU Males (n=274) IDU Females (n=178)
PLWHA: IDU Males and Females by Race/Ethnicity,
Alameda County 2011
IDU Males (n=274)
IDU Females (n=178)
3% 1%
1% 2%
6%
18%
13%
21%
White
White
AfrAmer
AfrAmer
Latino
Latino
API
API
Other/Unk
Other/Unk
62%
73%
7/17/2012
7/17/2012
PLWHA: IDU Males and Females by Age Group, Alameda County 2011 IDU Males (n=274) IDU Females
PLWHA: IDU Males and Females by Age Group, Alameda
County 2011
IDU Males (n=274)
IDU Females (n=178)
0.4%
2%
0‐12 yrs
0‐12 yrs
31%
13‐19 yrs
39%
13‐19 yrs
20‐29 yrs
20‐29 yrs
30‐49 yrs
30‐49 yrs
59%
69%
50+
50+
Summary Findings: PLWHA by Mode  Most PLWHA who are MSM & IDU are 30 years
Summary Findings: PLWHA by Mode
Most PLWHA who are MSM & IDU are 30 years and older
Whi
tes compr se a
i
hi
g er proport on o
h
i
f MSM & IDU
PLWHA than African Americans
African Americans females ar e a higher proportion of
PLWHA who are IDU than males