Correlations between community-level HIV preexposure prophylaxis coverage and individual-level sexual behaviors among United States MSM.
Journal
AIDS (London, England)
ISSN: 1473-5571
Titre abrégé: AIDS
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8710219
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 11 2022
15 11 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
26
7
2022
medline:
1
11
2022
entrez:
25
7
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate if community-level HIV PrEP coverage is correlated with individual sexual behaviors. We used demographic, behavioral, and sexual network data from ARTnet, a 2017-2019 study of United States MSM. Multivariable regression models with a Bayesian modeling framework were used to estimate associations between area-level PrEP coverage and seven sexual behavior outcomes [number of total, main, and casual male partners (network degree); count of one-time partnerships; consistent condom use in one-time partnerships; and frequency of casual partnership anal sex (total and condomless)], controlling for individual PrEP use. PrEP coverage ranged from 10.3% (Philadelphia) to 38.9% (San Francisco). Total degree was highest in Miami (1.35) and lowest in Denver (0.78), while the count of one-time partners was highest in San Francisco (11.7/year) and lowest in Detroit (1.5/year). Adjusting for individual PrEP use and demographics, community PrEP coverage correlated with total degree [adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) = 1.73; 95% credible interval (CrI), 0.92-3.44], casual degree (aIRR = 2.05; 95% CrI, 0.90-5.07), and count of one-time partnerships (aIRR = 1.90; 95% CrI, 0.46-8.54). Without adjustment for individual PrEP use, these associations strengthened. There were weaker or no associations with consistent condom use in one-time partnerships (aIRR = 1.68; 95% CrI, 0.86-3.35), main degree (aIRR = 1.21; 95% CrI, 0.48-3.20), and frequency of casual partnership condomless anal sex (aIRR = 0.23; 95% CrI, 0.01-3.60). Most correlations between community PrEP coverage and sexual behavior were explained by individual PrEP use. However, some residual associations remained after controlling for individual PrEP use, suggesting that PrEP coverage may partially drive community-level differences in sexual behaviors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35876641
doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000003343
pii: 00002030-202211150-00013
pmc: PMC9617766
mid: NIHMS1825722
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-HIV Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2015-2023Subventions
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : R01 AI138783
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : P30 AI050409
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R21 MH112449
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : K01 AI122853
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R01 MH128130
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : P2C HD042828
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV Surveillance Report 2019; 2021. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/library/reports/hiv-surveillance.html [Accessed 1 February 2021]
Riddell J, Amico IV, Mayer KH. HIV preexposure prophylaxis: a review . JAMA 2018; 319:1261–1268.
Sullivan PS, Sanchez TH, Zlotorzynska M, Chandler CJ, Sineath R, Kahle E, et al. National trends in HIV preexposure prophylaxis awareness, willingness and use among United States men who have sex with men recruited online, 2013 through 2017 . J Int AIDS Soc 2020; 23:e25461.
Smith DK, Sullivan PS, Cadwell B, Waller LA, Siddiqi A, Mera-Giler R, et al. Evidence of an association of increases in preexposure prophylaxis coverage with decreases in human immunodeficiency virus diagnosis rates in the United States, 2012-2016 . Clin Infect Dis 2020; 71:3144–3151.
Marcus JL, Paltiel AD, Walensky RP. Has preexposure prophylaxis made a difference at a population level? Jury is still out . Clin Infect Dis 2020; 71:3152–3153.
Jenness SM, Goodreau SM, Rosenberg E, Beylerian EN, Hoover KW, Smith DK, et al. Impact of the Centers for Disease Control's HIV preexposure prophylaxis guidelines for men who have sex with men in the United States . J Infect Dis 2016; 214:1800–1807.
Sullivan PS, Peterson J, Rosenberg ES, Kelley CF, Cooper H, Vaughan A, et al. Understanding racial HIV/STI disparities in black and white men who have sex with men: a multilevel approach . PLoS One 2014; 9:e90514.
Earnshaw VA, Bogart LM, Dovidio JF, Williams DR. Stigma and racial/ethnic HIV disparities: moving toward resilience . Am Psychol 2013; 68:225–236.
Holt M, Murphy DA. Individual versus community-level risk compensation following preexposure prophylaxis of HIV . Am J Public Health 2017; 107:1568–1571.
Marcus JL, Katz KA, Krakower DS, Calabrese SK. Risk compensation and clinical decision making — the case of HIV preexposure prophylaxis . N Engl J Med 2019; 380:510–512.
Traeger MW, Schroeder SE, Wright EJ, Hellard ME, Cornelisse VJ, Doyle JS, et al. Effects of preexposure prophylaxis for the prevention of human immunodeficiency virus infection on sexual risk behavior in men who have sex with men: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Clin Infect Dis 2018; 67:676–686.
Marcus JL, Hurley LB, Hare CB, Nguyen DP, Phengrasamy T, Silverberg MJ, et al. Preexposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention in a large integrated healthcare system: adherence, renal safety, and discontinuation . J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2016; 73:540–546.
Fine P, Eames K, Heymann DL. Herd Immunity”: a rough guide . Clin Infect Dis 2011; 52:911–916.
Holt M, Lea T, Bear B, Halliday D, Ellard J, Murphy D, et al. Trends in attitudes to and the use of HIV preexposure prophylaxis by Australian gay and bisexual men, 2011-2017: implications for further implementation from a diffusion of innovations perspective . AIDS Behav 2019; 23:1939–1950.
Chen YH, Snowden JM, McFarland W, Raymond HF. Preexposure prophylaxis use, seroadaptation, and sexual behavior among men who have sex with men, San Francisco, 2004-2014 . AIDS Behav 2016; 20:2791–2797.
Holt M, Lea T, Mao L, Kolstee J, Zablotska I, Duck T, et al. Community-level changes in condom use and uptake of HIV preexposure prophylaxis by gay and bisexual men in Melbourne and Sydney, Australia: results of repeated behavioural surveillance in 2013-17 . Lancet HIV 2018; 5:e448–e456.
Holt M, Broady TR, Mao L, Chan C, Rule J, Ellard J, et al. Increasing preexposure prophylaxis use and “net prevention coverage” in behavioural surveillance of Australian gay and bisexual men . AIDS Lond Engl 2021; 35:835–840.
Weiss KM, Goodreau SM, Morris M, Prasad P, Ramaraju R, Sanchez T, Jenness SM. Egocentric sexual networks of men who have sex with men in the United States: results from the ARTnet study . Epidemics 2020; 30:100386–1100386.
Stan Development Team. Stan Modeling Language Users Guide and Reference Manual . https://mc-stan.org [Accessed 1 March 2021]
McElreath R. rethinking: Statistical Rethinking book package; 2020.
Greenland S, Senn SJ, Rothman KJ, Carlin JB, Poole C, Goodman SN, Altman DG. Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations . Eur J Epidemiol 2016; 31:337–350.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Preexposure prophylaxis for the prevention of HIV infection in the United States—2017 update: a clinical practice guideline. Available at; https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/risk/prep/cdc-hiv-prep-guidelines-2017.pdf [Accessed 1 March 2021]
Carnegie NB, Morris M. Size matters: concurrency and the epidemic potential of HIV in small networks . PLoS One 2012; 7:e43048.
Jenness SM, Sharma A, Goodreau SM, Rosenberg ES, Weiss KM, Hoover KW, et al. Individual HIV risk versus population impact of risk compensation after HIV preexposure prophylaxis initiation among men who have sex with men . PLoS One 2017; 12:e0169484.
Huang YA, Zhu W, Smith DK, Harris N, Hoover KW. HIV preexposure prophylaxis, by race and ethnicity — United States, 2014-2016 . Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2018; 67:1147–1150.
Calabrese SK, Earnshaw VA, Underhill K, Hansen NB, Dovidio JF. The impact of patient race on clinical decisions related to prescribing HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis: assumptions about sexual risk compensation and implications for access . AIDS Behav 2014; 18:226–240.
Golub SA. PrEP Stigma: implicit and explicit drivers of disparity . Curr HIV/AIDS Rep 2018; 15:190–197.
Frye V, Koblin B, Chin J, Beard J, Blaney S, Halkitis P, et al. Neighborhood-level correlates of consistent condom use among men who have sex with men: a multi-level analysis . AIDS Behav 2010; 14:974–985.
Carlos J-A, Bingham TA, Stueve A, Lauby J, Ayala G, Millett GA, Wheeler D. The role of peer support on condom use among black and Latino MSM in three urban areas . AIDS Educ Prev 2010; 22:430–444.
Amirkhanian YA. Social networks, sexual networks and HIV risk in men who have sex with men . Curr HIV/AIDS Rep 2014; 11:81–92.
Chiasson MA, Parsons JT, Tesoriero JM, Carballo-Dieguez A, Hirshfield S, Remien RH. HIV behavioral research online . J Urban Health 2006; 83:73–85.
US Census Bureau. 2019 US Census Data. Available at: https://www.census.gov/data.html [Accessed 1 February 2021]