Antimicrobial Stewardship

Ebola

HCV / Hepatitis

Blood-Borne Diseases

Coronavirus / COVID

E. Coli

Food Safety

Listeria

Salmonella

Food Borne Infection / Food Safety

Candida auris

Fungal Infections

C. Difficile

H. Pylori

Norovirus

Gastrointestinal Infections

Healthcare Associated Infections (HAI)

Antibiotics

Immunizations

Vaccines

Prevention

Community-Acquired Pneumonia 

Influenza

Measles

Respiratory Infections

HIV / AIDS

PrEP

Sexually Transmitted Diseases

MRSA

Skin & Soft Tissue Diseases

Lyme Disease

ZIKA

Zoonotic & Vector-Borne Diseases

News

Media

Medical World News

Podcasts

Videos

Insights

Peer Exchange

Media Day

News Network

Roundtables

Conference

Conference Coverage

Conference Listing

Publication

CME/CE

Partners

Resources

Interactive Tools

Special Projects

Contribute

Case Studies

Writers and Mentors

Subscribe

Contagion® is a news resource for infectious disease specialists and practitioners, aiding identification, diagnosis, treatment and prevention.

About Us

Advertise

Editorial

Contact Us

Do Not Sell My Information

Privacy

Terms & Conditions

Contagion Live - Infectious Disease News & Expert Insights

Facebook

LinkedIn

Spotlight

Bench to Bedside With SIDP

C. difficile 

Clinical Corner

Hepatitis

RSV: A New Era in Prevention

Clinical

COVID-19

Climate Change

Covid Vaccine Race

Food-Borne Infections

Healthcare-Associated Infections

Respiratory Diseases

Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV)

Video Series

Peers and Perspectives

1rem

Authors

Examining pharmacological management in COVID-19 patients with ARDS requiring antifungal therapy during extracorporeal life support.

COVID-19–Associated Fungal Infections During EMCO: Review of Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Pharmacotherapy

Along with a 1 reported case in Massachusetts, the

New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has confirmed a person infected with eastern equine encephalitis (EEE) has died. The public health agency said the person was hospitalized due to severe central nervous system disease. The last reported human EEEV infection in New Hampshire was in 2014, when DHHS identified 3 human infections, including 2 fatalities. In the same statement, DHHS mentions there has been 1 confirmed case in Vermont this summer.

On August 16, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) released a statement discussing the confirmation of the first human case of EEE in the state this year. The confirmed case was discovered in an 80 year old man who was exposed to the vector borne disease in Worcester County. As a result, the risk level in the local communities of Douglas, Oxford, Sutton, and Webster has been raised to critical, and in Dudley, Northbridge, and Uxbridge the risk is increased to high.

Additionally, the neighboring communities of Auburn, Charlton, Grafton, Leicester, Mendon, Millbury, Millville, Southbridge, and Upton are now considered at moderate risk according to MDPH.

“This is the first time we have seen a person infected with EEE in Massachusetts since 2020,” Public Health Commissioner Robbie Goldstein, MD, PhD, said in a statement. “EEE is a rare but serious disease and a public health concern. We want to remind residents of the need to protect themselves from mosquito bites, especially in areas of the state where we are seeing EEE activity.

Though very rare, EEE is serious and a potentially fatal disease that can affect people of all ages. EEE is generally spread to humans through the bite of an infected mosquito. There were 12 human cases of EEE in Massachusetts in 2019 with 6 deaths, and 5 human cases with 1 death in 2020. There were no human cases of EEE in Massachusetts in 2021, 2022, or 2023.

EEE has a fatality rate of 33% to 70%, with most deaths occurring 2–10 days after the onset of symptoms.

In addition to a high mortality rate, long-term physical and mental complications, including permanent neurological deficits have been identified in many people who survive EEE.

Plymouth is approximately 40 miles south of Boston along the coast, and Worcester County is in the middle of the state, so the 2 areas are not in close proximity, but due to the elevated risk locally, the town of Plymouth decided to take action in response to outdoor parks. As of last Friday, all town public parks and fields are close daily from dusk until dawn.

“As Mass DPH has now elevated Plymouth’s EEE risk status to high, it is important to take extra precautions when outdoors and follow state and local health guidelines to avoid unnecessary risk to exposure to EEE. The health and safety of our community, residents, and visitors remain our priority,” Plymouth’s Commissioner of Health and Human Services, Michelle Bratti, said in a statement.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) most people who are infected with the virus do not develop symptoms; however, for those that do, the date from the bite to the onset of the illness is 4 to 10 days. EEE can also result in fever or neurologic disease. The type of illness will depend on the age of the person and other factors. Those who are infected can develop meningitis.

There are no FDA-approved treatments for EEE and for patients who develop severe cases, they can be hospitalized to receive supportive treatment.

Over the weekend, MDPH detailed plans of spraying for mosquitos including aerially in areas of Plymouth County, and truck-mounted spraying in parts of Worcester County. As of Saturday, 10 communities in Massachusetts were raised to high or critical risk for EEE virus.

“The risk from EEE is high in parts of Plymouth County and critical in parts of Worcester County,” State Epidemiologist Catherine M. Brown, DVM, said in a statement. “In addition to recommending that people use mosquito repellent with an EPA-registered active ingredient and clothing to reduce exposed skin, we also recommend that evening outdoor events be rescheduled to avoid the hours between dusk and dawn. The mosquitoes most likely to spread EEE are most active during the dusk to dawn hours.”

There are preventative strategies to avoid EEE, and the MDPH has listed such measures 

For those who live in Massachusetts and want more information on EEE, it can be found 

 or by calling the DPH Division of Epidemiology at 617-983-6800.

1.NH DHHS Identifies Person Infected with Eastern Equine Encephalitis Virus in New Hampshire.The New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services. August 27, 2024. Accessed August 28, 2024.
https://www.dhhs.nh.gov/news-and-media/nh-dhhs-identifies-person-infected-eastern-equine-encephalitis-virus-new-hampshire
2. State health officials announce season’s first human case of Eastern Equine Encephalitis in Massachusetts. MDPH. August 16, 2024. Accessed August 27, 2024.
https://www.mass.gov/news/state-health-officials-announce-seasons-first-human-case-of-eastern-equine-encephalitis-in-massachusetts
3.Plymouth to Close all Public Parks and Fields from Dusk to Dawn. Town of Plymouth. August 23, 2024. Accessed August 27, 2024. PDF.
4. Eastern Equine Encephalitis: Symptoms, Diagnosis, and Treatment. CDC. May 15, 2024. Accessed August 27, 2024.
https://www.cdc.gov/eastern-equine-encephalitis/symptoms-diagnosis-treatment/index.html
5. State officials announce plans to spray for mosquitoes in sections of Worcester and Plymouth counties due to EEE. MDPH. August 24, 2024. Accessed August 27, 2024. 
https://www.mass.gov/news/state-officials-announce-plans-to-spray-for-mosquitoes-in-sections-of-worcester-and-plymouth-counties-due-to-eee



The town of Plymouth decided to prohibit people from using the parks from dusk to dawn due to concerns over eastern equine encephalitis after a man contracted the rare disease in the state.

Concerns Over Mosquito-Borne Illness Causes Massachusetts Town to Create Curfew for Parks, Spraying in Counties

Sara Embry was newly pregnant and contracted 

 in a most unusual way. She picked up fecal spores at a local restaurant. She had not taken any antibiotics.

Like many people who get the infection, she initially struggled to find answers to her condition. She also lacked information from medical providers. She eventually found support through a 

, and became a peer volunteer, helping others experiencing the condition and seeking answers and comfort.

 to discuss her experience and her involvement with PLF. 

Can you share what it was like to be diagnosed with 

 while pregnant and how you managed both the infection and your pregnancy at the same time?

It was absolutely terrifying, because all the doctors and nurses whom I came in contact with didn't really have much experience with it. They misdiagnosed me. At first, I was extremely sick for a few weeks. 

I thought that I was going to lose my baby. 

For one, there was no information that I could find related to pregnancy and 

 online. I kept asking doctors about it, and no one could give me any information. They just told me that vancomycin was safe for my baby, and that was the extent of it. However, when I was experiencing 

, I was losing weight rapidly. I couldn't get out of bed. I couldn't keep any food down. And for anyone who has been pregnant, they know that nutrients are very important. Morning sickness is already hard, but then adding 

 on top of it—where you're rapidly losing the nutrients that you desperately need for your growing baby—the level of weakness that I experienced was something that I've never had before. My husband and I are modern-day homesteaders, so I'm used to being up and working, doing all the things that I need to do, and I just wasn't able to.

What were some of the most challenging aspects of your recovery  from 

Well, physically, I am already a rather small person, and keeping weight on has always been hard for me but especially in the first part of pregnancy. This was my third pregnancy. At the time, I already struggled with morning sickness and losing weight and trying to maintain that, but I lost 17 lb in a matter of a few weeks. I was extremely weak. I could not get out of bed.  My arms didn't even look like they belonged to me. They look like child's arms, and I was losing my muscles.

Walking across the house was expending all the energy that I had. That's something that I was absolutely not used to. And I had 2 other young children that I needed to care for, and I wasn't able to. It was hard on everybody in the family. My husband had to take off work, and not being able to care for myself was something I was not used to experiencing. 

Emotionally, there's an isolation that comes along with 

 that no one really talks about, because you can't invite people over. At first, they'll start offering to bring you meals or help with the kids, but they couldn't be over the house. It was so contagious, and I was terrified of passing it along to anyone. I couldn't let my children sit around me. They couldn't come and talk to me and play with me. It was horrible. It was hard on them. I had an active infection for over a month, and I was completely alone. I couldn't let anyone come around me. And that's something that really messes with your head whenever you are that isolated. 

And when I finally got over the active infection, the fear of recurrence is something that's almost like PTSD [posttraumatic stress disorder], because everything that I eat, I was worried. Am I going to be feeding the infection? Am I giving it? What am I doing to make it worse? What am I doing to make it better? It was every thought that I had. What can I do today that will help me tomorrow and not make it worse? But the fear of recurrence, I mean, I still struggle with that. One of the things that I do, I'm very, very strict about what I eat. Even over a year later, I don't compromise on my diet. I stick to what I know is safe, and that's something that I'm not sure if I'm ever going to be able to look past, because the impact that 

 has on your body is something that you can't even describe to someone unless they've seen it themselves. Even thinking about it just makes my stomach churn, because there's just nothing like it.

It's like PTSD, and it stays with you, even after the experience.



 In talking about this traumatic experience that you had with 

, how did it inspire you to get involved with the Peggy Lillis Foundation?

Yes, well, as I said earlier, finding information on 

was extremely hard. And eventually I did come across the Peggy Lillis Foundation, and they had a handbook for how to deal with the active infection, and it had recipes for foods that were safe. And what to do, like warning signs, all the things that you need to know, and that was the most in-depth. 

Whenever I reached out to them, I couldn't believe that they actually wanted to talk to me. They had people who were checking in on me, and not only did they provide me with the information that I needed to get through the infection but [also] that level of isolation that I talked about. The Peggy Lillis Foundation really helped me with that, because they understood—Christian [PLF cofounder] losing his mom, he really understands—and speaking to them, it just made me feel like I wasn't alone, [when] I had felt alone throughout the whole process up until that point. And so with them, I believe that they're doing good work, and I'm just so incredibly thankful that I want to be able to do that for other people.

In terms of looking at a potential message, what do you hope to convey to the public as well as policy makers through your advocacy work with the foundation?

Yes, well, I stand behind the Peggy Lillis Foundation's vision of where we believe in a world where 

is rare, treatable, and survivable. We believe in spreading awareness and knowing what people are going through, that they're not alone, and that you can get through it [to] the other side. And with me being pregnant, for all those women out there who may have it and can't find any information like I did, my baby is happy and healthy and strong, and they can get through it, too.

 What are the biggest misconceptions about 

, and how can we build better awareness to improve prevention and treatment?

 I think that the biggest misconception is that it won't happen to me. We are people who eat the food that we grow; I'm very health conscious, and it happened to me. It can happen to anybody. The mindset that it won't happen to me. It's for [older] people or people with compromised immune systems or people who take antibiotics. I didn't take any antibiotics. I picked it up by going to a birthday dinner with someone at a restaurant. It can happen to anyone, and it can pull the rug out from underneath you faster than you believe.

I think that another misconception is that it's rare. It's estimated to cause half a million infections each year. It's something that [for] everyone whom I've encountered, they have never heard of it before, and it's happening to so many people.

It's not as rare as we think. I think that everyone just needs to be aware that it is a possibility that could happen to you if you're taking antibiotics, and doctors should warn you. You know this could be an adverse effect of taking an antibiotic, and do you really need the antibiotic? If the answer is yes, then absolutely take it, but if the answer is no, let's explore some other options. Because it's way worse than just trying to describe it to people, but it's definitely something that would outweigh me considering taking the antibiotic again. You take antibiotics once, and you can get 

And also that the spores are everywhere; it's not just spread by taking antibiotics.

It could be on the grocery cart at the store. You don't know, and you need to wash your hands properly. And even then, don't touch your face, and all the things that they've been drilling into our heads the last few years of COVID-19. 

I think that awareness is key. I had never heard of it before. Maybe if I had, I wouldn't have felt so helpless in the beginning. The doctors and nurses whom I encountered were ignorant as well. They just diagnosed me and sent me on my way. They didn't send me any information about it. I had to learn from myself how sick I was, and that was pretty terrifying on its own. Awareness is a big one, because for something that no one's ever heard of, it's affecting a lot of people.

 Can you talk about what you're doing with PLF?

 I attended the summit, and we went to Capitol Hill. We advocated for being able to make your own decisions. As far as prescriptions, having some freedom with your doctor and insurance companies, not dictating what we are allowed to have. There are options when it comes to 

, and being able to advocate for yourself what you need is very important.

And since the summit, I have been working as a peer support volunteer. Anyone who's going through an active infection can contact me. PLF will assign them to me, and I can call them, email them, whatever they are in the need of, what they feel like. Some people don't actually feel like talking on the phone whenever they're in the middle of an infection, but they can email me and I'll email them back, or they can text me and I just offer that I'm a friend who has been through it. We talked about the isolation of it when you don't know anyone who's going through what you've gone through. I can't give medical advice. Obviously, I'm not a doctor, but if you have questions about what to know or just how I got through some stuff, I'll share my story with them and walk them through it. Just being able to speak to someone who knows really makes a difference. And that's what I want to try to do for other people.

Sara Embry discusses her experience with the infection while pregnant and as a mother to young children as well as finding the Peggy Lillis Foundation to help her cope with the infection and subsequently work as a peer support volunteer for the organization.

A Young Mother With C difficile Deals With Social Isolation, Concerns of Recurrence

Carl Schmid on Supreme Court Ruling Upholding ACA Preventive Coverage and Its Impact on HIV Prevention

In a 6-3 decision, the US Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act (ACA)’s requirement that private insurers cover preventive services recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) without cost sharing. The ruling, in 

, has major implications for access to HIV prevention tools such as preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and other critical screening services used by millions of Americans.

Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, called the decision “significant” and a win for public health protections. Reflecting on the broader impact of the ruling, Schmid noted its roots in bipartisan support for preventive care embedded in the original passage of the ACA. “When the Affordable Care Act was passed, Senator Harkin from Iowa emphasized the importance of focusing on prevention, not just treating people when they are sick. Everyone wanted their preventive services covered. We were up there pushing for coverage of things like HIV testing,” he explained.

Under the ACA, services given a grade of A or B by USPSTF must be covered without cost sharing. This includes a wide range of services such as colonoscopies, lung cancer screenings, smoking cessation therapy, HIV and hepatitis testing, and PrEP, which reduces the risk of HIV transmission.

“PrEP wasn’t around when the ACA was passed, but it has since been reviewed and given an A rating twice by USPSTF. These drugs are highly effective in preventing HIV. This is how we get PrEP and other preventive services to the public,” Schmid said. “Most people get health insurance through private plans, which are subject to ACA provisions. If we had lost this case, all that could have been at risk.”

The lawsuit originated in Texas and challenged the PrEP mandate on ideological grounds. Schmid addressed the motivations behind the case and the potential consequences if the law had been overturned. “This case originated from social conservatives in Texas who opposed covering PrEP, arguing that it promotes homosexuality and sex outside of marriage. But employers don’t know who among their employees might need PrEP. We shouldn’t pick and choose—we spread costs across the risk pool.”

“We’ve been fighting this case since March 2020—over 5 years—through lower courts, appeals courts, and now the Supreme Court. Around 150 million people use preventive services under this provision. So this is significant not only for our community but for many others as well,” Schmid said.

Though the ruling preserves access to existing preventive services, Schmid emphasized that insurers’ compliance remains a concern, especially as newer forms of PrEP, including long-acting injectables, enter the market. “Because of this ruling, we’re back to where we were a few weeks ago. Insurers are supposed to cover all preventive services rated A or B by the USPSTF without cost sharing. But there have already been compliance issues,” he said. “We’ve seen cases where people are charged for parts of a covered service, like being billed for anesthesia during a colonoscopy or for the visit itself, even when the service is preventive.”

He added that even with federal guidance requiring all forms of PrEP to be covered, insurers often create barriers. “There are several forms of PrEP. There’s the daily oral version, which is now available as a generic, as well as other oral drugs. There’s also an injectable version that’s administered every 2 months. Last year, the federal triagencies issued guidance stating that insurers must cover all forms of PrEP,” Schmid said.

“Despite this, we’re still hearing that people are facing prior authorization requirements and cost sharing for long-acting PrEP. These people need to report issues to their state insurance commissioners or the Department of Labor and push back on those barriers.” With the legal threat to preventive services resolved for now, Schmid said the next challenge is enforcement and education to ensure all individuals—regardless of income or background—can access the preventive care to which they are legally entitled.

Supreme Court upholds preventive services coverage requirements. News release. HIV+HEP Policy Institute. June 27, 2025. Accessed July 8, 2025. https://hivhep.org/press-releases/supreme-court-upholds-preventive-services-coverage-requirements/

HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute director discusses PrEP access, insurer compliance, and challenges ahead following the landmark decision.

Presented at ASM Microbe 2025, a bioinformatics-driven study has identified nine human microRNAs (miRNAs) with strong complementary binding to both hepatitis C virus (HCV) and bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV), supporting their potential use as targeted antiviral therapeutics.

HCV, a positive-sense single-stranded RNA virus in the Flaviviridae family, is a major cause of liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Despite the availability of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), challenges persist due to drug resistance and lack of a prophylactic vaccine. BVDV, a related pestivirus, is an established model for studying HCV due to its similar genomic structure.

Researchers from Diné College used multiple computational tools, NCBI BLAST-n, miRBase, and miRDB, to conduct over 36,400 sequence alignments. The objective was to identify human miRNAs with high sequence complementarity to the BVDV nucleocapsid gene and the HCV capsid gene across all six major genotypes.

Nine miRNAs demonstrated strong dual-binding affinity:

Each candidate aligned to both viral targets with two complementary sequence locations, suggesting potential for simultaneous inhibition of viral replication pathways in both BVDV and HCV. This multi-target interaction highlights their potential utility in developing a dual-acting therapeutic strategy.

The therapeutic concept relies on miRNAs’ ability to regulate gene expression post-transcriptionally by targeting viral mRNA. In this study, bioinformatics alignment confirmed that selected miRNAs can theoretically suppress viral protein synthesis by binding to conserved genomic regions.

The findings are especially relevant given the global burden of HCV, which affects an estimated 58 million people worldwide, and the continuing emergence of resistant viral strains. A miRNA-based antiviral could provide a nontraditional therapeutic approach that complements or enhances existing DAA regimens.

The investigators emphasized the need for preclinical validation to assess antiviral efficacy, off-target effects, delivery mechanisms, and safety profiles in both in vitro and in vivo models. This study provides foundational data for future development of miRNA-based antiviral therapies and reinforces the value of computational methods in early-stage therapeutic discovery.

Cayatineto HW, Hakim S. Interaction between candidate miRNAs, bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) nucleocapsid gene and hepatitis C virus (HCV) capsid gene: a promising antiviral therapeutic approach. Abstract AAR-IDS-202. Presented at ASM Microbe 2025. June 19-23, 2025. Los Angeles, CA.

Presented at ASM Microbe 2025, a bioinformatics study highlights 9 human miRNAs capable of binding and potentially inhibiting both hepatitis C and bovine viral diarrhea viruses.

Conferences

Dual-Targeting miRNAs Identified as Potential Therapeutics Against HCV and BVDV

Malaria elimination progress in Africa has stalled despite scale-up of standard control interventions. Mass drug administration (MDA) shows promise for reducing transmission, but evidence is limited for low-to-moderate transmission settings. To inform clinical practice, we interviewed study authors Michelle Hsiang, MD, MS, and Michelle E Roh, PhD, for expert insights on their recent trial.

Coverage of MDA improved across rounds, with 74%, 79%, and 81% of eligible participants receiving treatment in cycles one through three. No serious adverse events were reported, confirming safety. The adjusted reduction in malaria incidence was approximately 55% (95% CI, 28 to 71) during the intervention year but declined to 26% (95% CI, –17 to 53) post-intervention. Malaria incidence during the post-intervention transmission season remained 126 cases per 1000 population in the intervention arm versus 146 cases per 1000 in controls.

This open-label, cluster-randomized controlled trial in southeast Senegal randomized 60 villages with moderate-to-low seasonal malaria transmission (60–160 cases per 1000) to either three cycles of MDA with dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine plus single low-dose primaquine at 6-week intervals or standard seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) with sulfadoxine–pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was 

 incidence in the post-intervention season (July–December 2022). Safety, coverage, and incidence during the intervention year were secondary outcomes.


Hsiang and Roh emphasized that “in our study setting, where malaria transmission was moderate-to-low and highly seasonal and coverage of standard malaria control interventions (eg, vector control, surveillance, case management) was high, three rounds of MDA with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and single low-dose primaquine rapidly reduced malaria incidence by ~55%.” Although, “this effect was not sustained upon discontinuation of MDA, with none of the villages reaching pre-elimination levels (<5 cases per 1000 population) in the subsequent transmission season.”

Regarding future malaria control strategies, they recommend: “Ensure that the number of MDA rounds administered covers the full transmission season. It is likely that, in our study, partial coverage of the transmission season contributed to the weak sustained effect in the post-intervention year.” Furthermore, programs should “aim to reach >80% coverage of the population (supported by WHO recommendations), which may require strong community acceptance and engagement by the local health and administrative officials.” They also noted, “MDA is costly and resource-intensive and may require sustained commitment over several years to maximize benefits.”

On challenges to sustaining MDA’s impact, their recommendations include: “MDA will likely need to be repeated annually over several years until malaria incidence drops to low levels, at which point programs can consider transitioning to more targeted strategies such as focal MDA.” They stress that “to effectively reduce the parasite reservoir, the timing and frequency of MDA rounds should cover the entire transmission season.” Finally, “community sensitization and engagement are critical to reaching high coverage,” with additional efforts needed “to engage groups who may be less likely to participate in standard chemoprevention campaigns, including adults, adolescents, and highly mobile populations.”


The study’s open-label design and geographic focus limit generalizability. The diminished effect after cessation of MDA highlights the challenges of achieving sustained malaria control with limited intervention rounds.


MDA with dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine plus single low-dose primaquine is safe and reduces malaria incidence significantly during active administration in a moderate-to-low transmission African setting. Although, Hsiang and Roh conclude, “MDA will likely need to be repeated annually over several years until malaria incidence drops to low levels, at which point programs can consider transitioning to more targeted strategies such as focal MDA.” Successful malaria control via MDA requires optimized timing, full seasonal coverage, and strong community engagement to maintain gains.

1.Effect of mass drug administration on malaria incidence in southeast Senegal during 2020–22: a two-arm, open-label, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Ba, El-hadji Konko Ciré et al. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, Volume 25, Issue 6, 656 – 667. June 2025. Accessed July 7, 2025.

2.Brady OJ, Slater HC, Pemberton-Ross P, et al. Role of mass drug administration in elimination of Plasmodium falciparum malaria: a consensus modelling study. 

. 2017;5(7):e680-e687. doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30220-6

Significant short-term impact of MDA with dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine plus primaquine in a moderate-to-low transmission setting, highlighting the need for full seasonal coverage and community engagement to sustain gains.

Mass Drug Administration Reduces Malaria Incidence but Requires Sustained Effort in Southeast Senegal

In a 6–3 decision, the US Supreme Court ruled in 

 to uphold the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) provision mandating that insurers cover certain preventive services without cost sharing.¹ The ruling reaffirms the authority of the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), and the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) in determining the scope of covered services.

The case stemmed from a lawsuit brought by four individuals and two Christian-owned businesses in Texas, who objected to providing insurance that covers services such as HIV prevention medication (PrEP), the HPV vaccine, and contraceptives. The plaintiffs argued that the mandate violated their religious beliefs and that the USPSTF’s volunteer-led structure breached the Constitution’s Appointments Clause.²

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit previously held that the USPSTF’s structure was unconstitutional and restricted the federal government from enforcing its recommendations. The Supreme Court reversed that ruling, reinstating the ACA’s full preventive services requirement.²

In response, Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, issued a statement supporting the decision, stating, “This is a great victory for healthcare in our country and for everyone who believes in prevention... We are very pleased the Court upheld the coverage requirement.”¹

He emphasized the continuing need for oversight and compliance, particularly with the expansion of long-acting forms of HIV PrEP, and expressed concern about proposed federal budget cuts to CDC prevention programs.¹

The HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, along with 19 other public health organizations, filed an amicus brief supporting the federal government’s position. Their brief highlighted the public health significance of routine screenings and preventive medications, including their role in identifying infectious diseases and linking individuals to treatment.¹

The ACA, passed in 2010, delegates to USPSTF, ACIP, and HRSA the authority to define which services must be covered at no cost by private insurers. Since then, these bodies have recommended coverage for services such as PrEP (2019), the HPV vaccine (2007), and contraceptives (2011).²

The ruling ensures that insured individuals nationwide will continue to have access to preventive services such as HIV testing, cancer screenings, immunizations, and contraceptive care without cost-sharing requirements.

In our interview, Schmid discussed the ongoing Supreme Court case 

, which challenges the Affordable Care Act’s preventive services coverage requirement. Schmid emphasized the critical role this mandate plays in ensuring access to HIV prevention tools like PrEP, as well as testing for HIV and hepatitis, all at no cost to insured individuals.

6–3 ruling preserves no-cost insurance coverage for preventive services such as HIV PrEP, contraceptives, and screenings.

Mehrnaz Sadrolashrafi, PharmD, BCCCP

Articles

Latest Updated Articles