Maximizing Fit for Cloth and Medical Procedure Masks to Improve Performance and Reduce SARS-CoV-2 Transmission and Exposure, 2021

Universal masking is one of the prevention strategies recommended by CDC to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). As of February 1, 2021, 38 states and the District of Columbia had universal masking mandates. Mask wearing has also been mandated by executive order for federal property* as well as on domestic and international transportation conveyances.† Masks substantially reduce exhaled respiratory droplets and aerosols from infected wearers and reduce exposure of uninfected wearers to these particles. Cloth masks§ and medical procedure masks¶ fit more loosely than do respirators (e.g., N95 facepieces). The effectiveness of cloth and medical procedure masks can be improved by ensuring that they are well fitted to the contours of the face to prevent leakage of air around the masks' edges. During January 2021, CDC conducted experimental simulations using pliable elastomeric source and receiver headforms to assess the extent to which two modifications to medical procedure masks, 1) wearing a cloth mask over a medical procedure mask (double masking) and 2) knotting the ear loops of a medical procedure mask where they attach to the mask's edges and then tucking in and flattening the extra material close to the face (knotted and tucked masks), could improve the fit of these masks and reduce the receiver's exposure to an aerosol of simulated respiratory droplet particles of the size considered most important for transmitting SARS-CoV-2. The receiver's exposure was maximally reduced (>95%) when the source and receiver were fitted with modified medical procedure masks. These laboratory-based experiments highlight the importance of good fit to optimize mask performance. Until vaccine-induced population immunity is achieved, universal masking is a highly effective means to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2** when combined with other protective measures, such as physical distancing, avoiding crowds and poorly ventilated indoor spaces, and good hand hygiene. Innovative efforts to improve the fit of cloth and medical procedure masks to enhance their performance merit attention.

Prevalence, Incidence, and Clearance of Human Papillomavirus Types Covered by Current Vaccines in Men With Human Immunodeficiency Virus in the SUN Study

BACKGROUND

High-risk anal human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is prevalent among men living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV); the association between 9-valent (9v) high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) vaccine types and abnormal cytology has not been well characterized.

METHODS

We followed a prospective cohort study of persons with HIV at 7 HIV clinics in 4 US cities from March 2004 through June 2012. Annually, providers collected separate anal swabs for HPV detection and cytopathologic examination. Among men, we examined prevalence, incidence, and clearance of 9v HR-HPV vaccine types, compared with other HR types, and associations with abnormal cytology to assess potential vaccine impact.

RESULTS

Baseline prevalence of any anal 9v HR-HPV type among men who have sex with men (MSM) and men who have sex with women (MSW) was 74% and 25% (P < .001), respectively. Among 299 MSM, abnormal cytology was detected in 161 (54%) MSM and was associated with the presence of any 9v HR-HPV (relative risk [RR], 1.8 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.3-2.6]; P < .001). Among 61 MSW, abnormal anal cytology was detected in 12 (20%) and was associated with the presence of any 9v HR-HPV (RR, 4.3 [95% CI, 1.6-11.5]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among men with HIV, the prevalence of the 7 HR-HPV types in the 9v vaccine was high and was associated with abnormal cytology. These findings indicate that men with HIV could benefit from prophylactic administration of the 9v HPV vaccine.

Performance of Oropharyngeal Swab Testing Compared With Nasopharyngeal Swab Testing for Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease 2019-United States, January 2020-February 2020

Among 146 nasopharyngeal (NP) and oropharyngeal (OP) swab pairs collected ≤7 days after illness onset, Real-Time Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction assay for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR) diagnostic results were 95.2% concordant. However, NP swab cycle threshold values were lower (indicating more virus) in 66.7% of concordant-positive pairs, suggesting NP swabs may more accurately detect the amount of SARS-CoV-2.

Association of Immunosuppression and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Viremia With Anal Cancer Risk in Persons Living With HIV in the United States and Canada

BACKGROUND

People living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; PLWH) have a markedly elevated anal cancer risk, largely due to loss of immunoregulatory control of oncogenic human papillomavirus infection. To better understand anal cancer development and prevention, we determined whether recent, past, cumulative, or nadir/peak CD4+ T-cell count (CD4) and/or HIV-1 RNA level (HIV RNA) best predict anal cancer risk.

METHODS

We studied 102 777 PLWH during 1996-2014 from 21 cohorts participating in the North American AIDS Cohort Collaboration on Research and Design. Using demographics-adjusted, cohort-stratified Cox models, we assessed associations between anal cancer risk and various time-updated CD4 and HIV RNA measures, including cumulative and nadir/peak measures during prespecified moving time windows. We compared models using the Akaike information criterion.

RESULTS

Cumulative and nadir/peak CD4 or HIV RNA measures from approximately 8.5 to 4.5 years in the past were generally better predictors for anal cancer risk than their corresponding more recent measures. However, the best model included CD4 nadir (ie, the lowest CD4) from approximately 8.5 years to 6 months in the past (hazard ratio [HR] for <50 vs ≥500 cells/µL, 13.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.5-51.0) and proportion of time CD4 <200 cells/µL from approximately 8.5 to 4.5 years in the past (a cumulative measure; HR for 100% vs 0%, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.5-6.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results are consistent with anal cancer promotion by severe, prolonged HIV-induced immunosuppression. Nadir and cumulative CD4 may represent useful markers for identifying PLWH at higher anal cancer risk.

SARS-CoV-2 Transmission From People Without COVID-19 Symptoms

Importance

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is readily transmitted person to person. Optimal control of COVID-19 depends on directing resources and health messaging to mitigation efforts that are most likely to prevent transmission, but the relative importance of such measures has been disputed.

Objective

To assess the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions in the community that likely occur from persons without symptoms.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This decision analytical model assessed the relative amount of transmission from presymptomatic, never symptomatic, and symptomatic individuals across a range of scenarios in which the proportion of transmission from people who never develop symptoms (ie, remain asymptomatic) and the infectious period were varied according to published best estimates. For all estimates, data from a meta-analysis was used to set the incubation period at a median of 5 days. The infectious period duration was maintained at 10 days, and peak infectiousness was varied between 3 and 7 days (-2 and +2 days relative to the median incubation period). The overall proportion of SARS-CoV-2 was varied between 0% and 70% to assess a wide range of possible proportions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Level of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from presymptomatic, never symptomatic, and symptomatic individuals.

Results

The baseline assumptions for the model were that peak infectiousness occurred at the median of symptom onset and that 30% of individuals with infection never develop symptoms and are 75% as infectious as those who do develop symptoms. Combined, these baseline assumptions imply that persons with infection who never develop symptoms may account for approximately 24% of all transmission. In this base case, 59% of all transmission came from asymptomatic transmission, comprising 35% from presymptomatic individuals and 24% from individuals who never develop symptoms. Under a broad range of values for each of these assumptions, at least 50% of new SARS-CoV-2 infections was estimated to have originated from exposure to individuals with infection but without symptoms.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this decision analytical model of multiple scenarios of proportions of asymptomatic individuals with COVID-19 and infectious periods, transmission from asymptomatic individuals was estimated to account for more than half of all transmissions. In addition to identification and isolation of persons with symptomatic COVID-19, effective control of spread will require reducing the risk of transmission from people with infection who do not have symptoms. These findings suggest that measures such as wearing masks, hand hygiene, social distancing, and strategic testing of people who are not ill will be foundational to slowing the spread of COVID-19 until safe and effective vaccines are available and widely used.

SARS-CoV-2 Serologic Assay Needs for the Next Phase of the US COVID-19 Pandemic Response

BACKGROUND

There is a need for validated and standardized severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) quantitative immunoglobulin G (IgG) and neutralization assays that can be used to understand the immunology and pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and support the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic response.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted to identify English language publications from peer-reviewed journals and preprints from January 2020 through November 6, 2020. Relevant publications were reviewed for mention of IgG or neutralization assays for SARS-CoV-2, or both, and the methods of reporting assay results.

RESULTS

Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 IgG results have been reported from a limited number of studies; most studies used in-house laboratory-developed tests in limited settings, and only two semiquantitative tests have received US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). As of November 6, 2020, there is only one SARS-CoV-2 neutralization assay with FDA EUA. Relatively few studies have attempted correlation of quantitative IgG titers with neutralization results to estimate surrogates of protection. The number of individuals tested is small compared with the magnitude of the pandemic, and persons tested are not representative of disproportionately affected populations. Methods of reporting quantitative results are not standardized to enable comparisons and meta-analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of standardized SARS-CoV-2 quantitative IgG and neutralization assays precludes comparison of results from published studies. Interassay and interlaboratory validation and standardization of assays will support efforts to better understand antibody kinetics and longevity of humoral immune responses postillness, surrogates of immune protection, and vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. Public-private partnerships could facilitate realization of these advances in the United States and worldwide.

Summary of Guidance for Public Health Strategies to Address High Levels of Community Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and Related Deaths, December 2020

In the 10 months since the first confirmed case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was reported in the United States on January 20, 2020 (1), approximately 13.8 million cases and 272,525 deaths have been reported in the United States. On October 30, the number of new cases reported in the United States in a single day exceeded 100,000 for the first time, and by December 2 had reached a daily high of 196,227.* With colder weather, more time spent indoors, the ongoing U.S. holiday season, and silent spread of disease, with approximately 50% of transmission from asymptomatic persons (2), the United States has entered a phase of high-level transmission where a multipronged approach to implementing all evidence-based public health strategies at both the individual and community levels is essential. This summary guidance highlights critical evidence-based CDC recommendations and sustainable strategies to reduce COVID-19 transmission. These strategies include 1) universal face mask use, 2) maintaining physical distance from other persons and limiting in-person contacts, 3) avoiding nonessential indoor spaces and crowded outdoor spaces, 4) increasing testing to rapidly identify and isolate infected persons, 5) promptly identifying, quarantining, and testing close contacts of persons with known COVID-19, 6) safeguarding persons most at risk for severe illness or death from infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, 7) protecting essential workers with provision of adequate personal protective equipment and safe work practices, 8) postponing travel, 9) increasing room air ventilation and enhancing hand hygiene and environmental disinfection, and 10) achieving widespread availability and high community coverage with effective COVID-19 vaccines. In combination, these strategies can reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission, long-term sequelae or disability, and death, and mitigate the pandemic's economic impact. Consistent implementation of these strategies improves health equity, preserves health care capacity, maintains the function of essential businesses, and supports the availability of in-person instruction for kindergarten through grade 12 schools and preschool. Individual persons, households, and communities should take these actions now to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission from its current high level. These actions will provide a bridge to a future with wide availability and high community coverage of effective vaccines, when safe return to more everyday activities in a range of settings will be possible.

Human Immunodeficiency Virus Epidemic Control in the United States: An Assessment of Proposed UNAIDS Metrics, 2010-2015

Epidemic control is necessary to eliminate human immunodeficiency virus infections. We assessed epidemic control in the United States by applying 4 proposed UNAIDS metrics to national surveillance data collected between 2010 and 2015. Although epidemic control in the United States is possible, progress by UNAIDS metrics has been mixed.

Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine Prescribing Patterns by Provider Specialty Following Initial Reports of Potential Benefit for COVID-19 Treatment - United States, January-June 2020

Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, primarily used to treat autoimmune diseases and to prevent and treat malaria, received national attention in early March 2020, as potential treatment and prophylaxis for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). On March 20, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) for chloroquine phosphate and hydroxychloroquine sulfate in the Strategic National Stockpile to be used by licensed health care providers to treat patients hospitalized with COVID-19 when the providers determine the potential benefit outweighs the potential risk to the patient.* Following reports of cardiac and other adverse events in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 (2), on April 24, 2020, FDA issued a caution against its use^† and on June 15, rescinded its EUA for hydroxychloroquine from the Strategic National Stockpile.^§ Following the FDA's issuance of caution and EUA rescindment, on May 12 and June 16, the federal COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel issued recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19; the panel also noted that at that time no medication could be recommended for COVID-19 pre- or postexposure prophylaxis outside the setting of a clinical trial (3). However, public discussion concerning the effectiveness of these drugs on outcomes of COVID-19 (4,5), and clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis of COVID-19 continue.^¶ In response to recent reports of notable increases in prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine (6), CDC analyzed outpatient retail pharmacy transaction data to identify potential differences in prescriptions dispensed by provider type during January-June 2020 compared with the same period in 2019. Before 2020, primary care providers and specialists who routinely prescribed hydroxychloroquine, such as rheumatologists and dermatologists, accounted for approximately 97% of new prescriptions. New prescriptions by specialists who did not typically prescribe these medications (defined as specialties accounting for ≤2% of new prescriptions before 2020) increased from 1,143 prescriptions in February 2020 to 75,569 in March 2020, an 80-fold increase from March 2019. Although dispensing trends are returning to prepandemic levels, continued adherence to current clinical guidelines for the indicated use of these medications will ensure their availability and benefit to patients for whom their use is indicated (3,4), because current data on treatment and pre- or postexposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 indicate that the potential benefits of these drugs do not appear to outweigh their risks.

Assessing Solid Organ Donors and Monitoring Transplant Recipients for Human Immunodeficiency Virus, Hepatitis B Virus, and Hepatitis C Virus Infection - U.S. Public Health Service Guideline, 2020

The recommendations in this report supersede the U.S Public Health Service (PHS) guideline recommendations for reducing transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) through organ transplantation (Seem DL, Lee I, Umscheid CA, Kuehnert MJ. PHS guideline for reducing human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B virus, and hepatitis C virus transmission through organ transplantation. Public Health Rep 2013;128:247-343), hereafter referred to as the 2013 PHS guideline. PHS evaluated and revised the 2013 PHS guideline because of several advances in solid organ transplantation, including universal implementation of nucleic acid testing of solid organ donors for HIV, HBV, and HCV; improved understanding of risk factors for undetected organ donor infection with these viruses; and the availability of highly effective treatments for infection with these viruses. PHS solicited feedback from its relevant agencies, subject-matter experts, additional stakeholders, and the public to develop revised guideline recommendations for identification of risk factors for these infections among solid organ donors, implementation of laboratory screening of solid organ donors, and monitoring of solid organ transplant recipients. Recommendations that have changed since the 2013 PHS guideline include updated criteria for identifying donors at risk for undetected donor HIV, HBV, or HCV infection; the removal of any specific term to characterize donors with HIV, HBV, or HCV infection risk factors; universal organ donor HIV, HBV, and HCV nucleic acid testing; and universal posttransplant monitoring of transplant recipients for HIV, HBV, and HCV infections. The recommendations are to be used by organ procurement organization and transplant programs and are intended to apply only to solid organ donors and recipients and not to donors or recipients of other medical products of human origin (e.g., blood products, tissues, corneas, and breast milk). The recommendations pertain to transplantation of solid organs procured from donors without laboratory evidence of HIV, HBV, or HCV infection. Additional considerations when transplanting solid organs procured from donors with laboratory evidence of HCV infection are included but are not required to be incorporated into Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network policy. Transplant centers that transplant organs from HCV-positive donors should develop protocols for obtaining informed consent, testing and treating recipients for HCV, ensuring reimbursement, and reporting new infections to public health authorities.

Evidence Supporting Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 While Presymptomatic or Asymptomatic

Recent epidemiologic, virologic, and modeling reports support the possibility of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission from persons who are presymptomatic (SARS-CoV-2 detected before symptom onset) or asymptomatic (SARS-CoV-2 detected but symptoms never develop). SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the absence of symptoms reinforces the value of measures that prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 by infected persons who may not exhibit illness despite being infectious. Critical knowledge gaps include the relative incidence of asymptomatic and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, the public health interventions that prevent asymptomatic transmission, and the question of whether asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection confers protective immunity.

HIV prescriptions on the frontlines: Primary care providers' use of antiretrovirals for prevention in the Southeast United States, 2017

HIV disproportionately affects persons in Southeast United States. Primary care providers (PCPs) are vital for HIV prevention. Data are limited about their prescribing of antiretrovirals (ARVs) for prevention, including non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP), pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), and antiretroviral therapy (ART). We examined these practices to assess gaps. During April-August 2017, we conducted an online survey of PCPs in Atlanta, Baltimore, Baton Rouge, Miami, New Orleans, and Washington, DC to assess HIV-related knowledge, attitudes and practices. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to estimate correlates of nPEP, PrEP and ART prescribing practices. Adjusting for MSA and specialty, the weighted sample (n = 820, 29.6% adjusted response rate) comprised 60.2% white and 59.4% females. PCPs reported ever prescribing nPEP (31.0%), PrEP (18.1%), and ART (27.2%). Prescribing nPEP was associated with nPEP familiarity (aPR = 2.63, 95% CI 1.59, 4.35) and prescribing PrEP (aPR = 3.57, 95% CI 2.78, 4.55). Prescribing PrEP was associated with PrEP familiarity (aPR = 4.35, 95% CI 2.63, 7.14), prescribing nPEP (aPR = 5.00, 95% CI 2.00, 12.50), and providing care for persons with HIV (aPR = 1.56, 95% CI 1.06, 2.27). Prescribing ART was associated with nPEP familiarity (aPR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.27, 2.78) and practicing in outpatient public practice versus hospital-based facilities (aPR = 2.14 95% CI 1.51, 3.04), and inversely associated with collaborations involving specialists (aPR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.42, 0.86). A minority of PCPs surveyed from the Southeast report ever prescribing ARVs for prevention. Future efforts should include enhancing HIV care coordination and developing strategies to increase use of biomedical tools.

Changes in HIV antiretroviral prescribing practices in the United States

We analyzed nationally representative medical record data from the Medical Monitoring Project (MMP) to estimate prevalence of antiretroviral (ARV) agents prescribed for US adults with diagnosed HIV and to examine recent changes in prescribing practices. The MMP uses a multi-stage sample survey methodology to produce nationally representative annual estimates of characteristics of adults with diagnosed HIV in the US and Puerto Rico. We compared weighted prevalence of most recent ARV prescriptions from 3368 adults interviewed during June 2015–May 2016 and from 3717 adults interviewed during June 2016–May 2017. We also compared weighted prevalence of the first ARV prescriptions among those who initiated ART during these time periods. Among patients initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART), prescription of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) as part of initial regimen decreased across the time periods from 38.5% to 26.6% ( P = 0.01). Prescription of protease inhibitors (PI) did not change (17.0% and 14.5%). Prescription of integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) increased (54.7 to 70.2%, P = 0.004) due mostly to increased prescription of dolutegravir (13.9% to 32.5%). Among all patients, prescription of NNRTIs remained stable across (44.5% and 43.2%). Prescriptions of PIs decreased significantly, from 36.5% to 32.4% ( P = 0.006), as did prescription of individual PIs except darunavir. In contrast, prescription of INSTIs increased from 43.4% to 50.7% ( P < 0.001), due mostly to increased prescription of dolutegravir and elvitegravir. ART prescribing practices changed rapidly across the examined time periods. Following guidelines, INSTI prescription increased significantly among all U.S adults with diagnosed HIV, including adults initiating ART.

Prevalence and Incidence of Anal and Cervical High-Risk Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Types Covered by Current HPV Vaccines Among HIV-Infected Women in the SUN Study

Background

Nonavalent (9v) human papilloma virus vaccine targets high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) types 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, 58, and low-risk 6, 11. We examined prevalence, incidence, and clearance of anal and cervical HR-HPV in HIV-infected women.

Methods

The SUN Study enrolled 167 US women in 2004-2006. Anal and cervical specimens were collected annually for cytology and identification of 37 HPV types: 14 HR included: 9v 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, 58; non-9v 35, 39, 51, 56, 59, 66, 68.

Results

Baseline characteristics of 126 women included: median age 38 years; 57% non-Hispanic black; 67% HIV RNA < 400 copies/mL; 90% CD4 counts ≥200 cells/mm3. HPV prevalence at anus and cervix was 90% and 83%; for 9v HR-HPV types, 67% and 51%; non-9v HR-HPV, 54% and 29%, respectively. The 9v and non-9v HR-HPV incidence rates/100 person-years were similar (10.4 vs 9.5; 8.5 vs 8.3, respectively); 9v clearance rates were 42% and 61%; non-9v 46% and 59%, in anus and cervix, respectively.

Conclusions

Anal HR-HPV prevalence was higher than cervical, with lower clearance; incidence was similar. Although prevalence of non-9v HR-HPV was substantial, 9v HR-HPV types were generally more prevalent. These findings support use of nonavalent vaccine in HIV-infected women.

Quantifying the risk of undetected HIV, hepatitis B virus, or hepatitis C virus infection in Public Health Service increased risk donors

To reduce the risk of HIV, hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) transmission through organ transplantation, donors are universally screened for these infections by nucleic acid tests (NAT). Deceased organ donors are classified as "increased risk" if they engaged in specific behaviors during the 12 months before death. We developed a model to estimate the risk of undetected infection for HIV, HBV, and HCV among NAT-negative donors specific to the type and timing of donors' potential risk behavior to guide revisions to the 12-month timeline. Model parameters were estimated, including risk of disease acquisition for increased risk groups, number of virions that multiply to establish infection, virus doubling time, and limit of detection by NAT. Monte Carlo simulation was performed. The risk of undetected infection was <1/1 000 000 for HIV after 14 days, for HBV after 35 days, and for HCV after 7 days from the time of most recent potential exposure to the day of a negative NAT. The period during which reported donor risk behaviors result in an "increased risk" designation can be safely shortened.

Prevalence, Incidence, and Clearance of Anal High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Infection Among HIV-Infected Men in the SUN Study

Background

The natural history of anal human papilloma virus (HPV) infection among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected men is unknown.

Methods

Annually, from 2004 to 2012, we examined baseline prevalence, incidence, and clearance of anal HPV infection at 48 months, and associated factors among HIV-infected men.

Results

We examined 403 men who have sex with men (MSM) and 96 men who have sex with women (MSW) (median age 42 years for both, 78% versus 81% prescribed cART, median CD4+ T-lymphocyte cell count 454 versus 379 cells/mm3, and 74% versus 75% had undetectable viral load, respectively). Type 16 prevalence among MSM and MSW was 38% versus 14% (P < .001), and incidence 24% versus 7% (P = .001). Type 18 prevalence was 24% versus 8% (P < .001), and incidence 13% versus 4% (P = .027). Among MSM and MSW, clearance of prevalent HPV 16 and HPV 18 was 31% and 60% (P = .392), and 47% and 25% (P = .297), respectively. Among MSM, receptive anal sex (with or without a condom) was associated with persistent HPV 16 (OR 2.24, P < .001).

Conclusions

MSM had higher prevalence and incidence of HPV than MSW, but similar clearance. Receptive anal sex may predict cancer risk among HIV-infected MSM.

Lower serum adiponectin level is associated with lipodystrophy among HIV-infected men in the Study to Understand the Natural History of HIV/AIDS in the Era of Effective Therapy (SUN) study

OBJECTIVES

Adiponectin levels are inversely related to cardiovascular risk and are low in diabetics and obese persons. We examined the association between adiponectin concentration and HIV-associated lipodystrophy, which remains unclear.

METHODS

The Study to Understand the Natural History of HIV/AIDS in the Era of Effective Therapy (SUN) was a prospective cohort study of HIV-infected adults conducted in four US cities. Lean body and fat masses were assessed using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans. Using baseline data from 2004 to 2006, we defined lipodystrophy using a sex-specific fat mass ratio and performed cross-sectional analyses of associated risks using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 440 male participants (median age 42 years; 68% non-Hispanic white; 88% prescribed combination antiretroviral therapy; median CD4 lymphocyte count 468 cells/μL; 76% with viral load < 400 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL; 5% diabetic; median body mass index 25 kg/m² ), median concentrations of leptin and adiponectin were 3.04 ng/L [interquartile range (IQR) 1.77-5.43 ng/L] and 8005 μg/mL (IQR 4950-11 935 μg/mL), respectively. The prevalence of lipodystrophy was 14%. Lipodystrophy was significantly associated with increasing age [prevalence ratio (PR) 1.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-2.06, per 10 years], adiponectin < 8005 μg/mL (PR 5.02; 95% CI 2.53-9.95), ever stavudine use (PR 2.26; 95% CI 1.36-3.75), CD4 cell count > 500 cells/μL (PR 2.59; 95% CI 1.46-4.61), viral load < 400 copies/mL (PR 3.98; 95% CI 1.25-12.6), highly sensitive C-reactive protein < 1.61 mg/L (PR 1.91; 95% CI 1.11-3.28) and smoking (PR 0.42; 95% CI 0.22-0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

Among men in this HIV-infected cohort, the prevalence of lipodystrophy was similar to previous estimates for persons living with HIV, and was associated with lower adiponectin levels, potentially indicating increased cardiovascular disease risk.

Modes of Transmission of Zika Virus

For >60 years, Zika virus (ZIKV) has been recognized as an arthropod-borne virus with Aedes species mosquitoes as the primary vector. However in the past 10 years, multiple alternative routes of ZIKV transmission have been identified. We review the available data on vector and non-vector-borne modes of transmission and interventions undertaken, to date, to reduce the risk of human infection through these routes. Although much has been learned during the outbreak in the Americas on the underlying mechanisms and pathogenesis of non-vector-borne ZIKV infections, significant gaps remain in our understanding of the relative incidence of, and risk from, these modes compared to mosquito transmission. Additional research is urgently needed on the risk, pathogenesis, and effectiveness of measures to mitigate non-vector-borne ZIKV transmission.