Frequent screening for asymptomatic chlamydia and gonorrhoea infections in men who have sex with men: time to re-evaluate?

Unnecessary antibiotic use in men who have sex with men (MSM) with anogenital symptoms attending a sexual health clinic: a retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the amount of unnecessary antibiotics, in particular ceftriaxone, given to men who have sex with men (MSM) with anogenital symptoms as part of presumptive management in an urban sexual health clinic and examine factors associated with unnecessary ceftriaxone.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of electronic records from all visits involving MSM reporting symptoms of bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) and who received presumptive antibiotics at Sydney Sexual Health Centre. The following variables were extracted: demographic and sexual behaviour data, presenting symptoms, prior STI diagnoses, use of anoscopy, use of point-of-care microscopy, prescriptions of antibiotics and subsequent nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) results for chlamydia and gonorrhoea in all anatomical sites (urethra, pharynx and rectum). We defined unnecessary antibiotic as an agent prescribed to treat an STI organism that was subsequently not detected.

RESULTS

Among 1061 visits in this analysis, 41.8% yielded negative NAAT results for both chlamydia and gonorrhoea in all anatomical sites. There were 44.3% of visits which had positive gonorrhoea NAAT result in at least one anatomical site. There were 187 courses of ceftriaxone prescribed in patients who tested negative for gonorrhoea in all anatomical sites and therefore were unnecessary. Unnecessary ceftriaxone prescribing occurred in 50.2% of visits with anorectal symptoms, 19.6% of scrotal symptoms and 7.3% of urethral symptoms. Microscopy was associated with significantly less unnecessary ceftriaxone in urethral but not anorectal or scrotal presentations. In multivariable analysis, the following factors were associated with a higher likelihood of unnecessary ceftriaxone use: anorectal symptoms, scrotal symptoms, gonorrhoea in the preceding year, contact of a bacterial STI and living with HIV.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the significant amount of unnecessary ceftriaxone used for STI symptoms in MSM. A new pathway incorporating rapid point-of-care molecular testing in symptomatic patients may improve the precision of antibiotic prescribing and reduce unnecessary use.

Effect of mass treatment on the long-term prevalence of gonorrhoea, chlamydia and syphilis-a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Selective mass treatment of STIs may lead to a durable reduction in the prevalence of STIs or a temporary reduction associated with an increased probability of antimicrobial resistance emerging.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Google Scholar for studies evaluating the impact of mass STI treatment on the long-term prevalence of chlamydia, gonorrhoea, syphilis and chancroid. The primary outcomes were the long term (≥3 months post the intervention) impact of the intervention on prevalence/incidence of the STI and on antimicrobial resistance.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 269 studies, of which 4 met the inclusion criteria. With the exception of the Carletonville study, where this was not assessed, three of the four studies found that intensive STI treatment was associated with a reduced prevalence of the targeted STI during or immediately after the intervention. In all four studies, there was no evidence that the intense treatment had a long-term effect on prevalence. In the only study where this was assessed, the intensive use of penicillin to reduce gonococcal prevalence was associated with the emergence of reduced susceptibility to penicillin in N. gonorrhoeae.

CONCLUSION

The available evidence suggests that mass treatment of chlamydia, gonorrhoea and syphilis in high prevalence populations is only associated with a temporary reduction in the prevalence of these infections and may select for antimicrobial resistance.

Effect of screening for Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis on incidence of these infections in men who have sex with men and transgender women taking HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (the Gonoscreen study): results from a randomised, multicentre, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend screening for Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis at three anatomical sites (urethra, anus, and pharynx) every 3 months (3 × 3) in men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women taking HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). We present the first randomised controlled trial to compare the effect of screening versus non-screening for N gonorrhoeae and C trachomatis on the incidence of these infections in MSM and transgender women taking PrEP.

METHODS

A multicentre, randomised, controlled trial of 3 × 3 screening for N gonorrhoeae and C trachomatis versus non-screening was done among MSM and transgender women taking PrEP in five HIV reference centers in Belgium. Participants attended the PrEP clinics quarterly for 12 months. N gonorrhoeae and C trachomatis was tested at each visit in both arms, but results were not provided to the non-screening arm, if asymptomatic. The primary outcome was incidence rate of N gonorrhoeae and C trachomatis infections in each arm, assessed in the per-protocol population. Non-inferiority of the non-screening arm was proven if the upper limit of the 95% CI of the incidence rate ratio (IRR) was lower than 1·25. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04269434, and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 21, 2020, and June 4, 2021, 506 participants were randomly assigned to the 3 × 3 screening arm and 508 to the non-screening arm. The overall incidence rate of N gonorrhoeae and C trachomatis was 0·155 cases per 100 person-days (95% CI 0·128-0·186) in the 3 × 3 screening arm and 0·205 (95% CI 0·171-0·246) in the non-screening arm. The incidence rate was significantly higher in the non-screening arm (IRR 1·318, 95% CI 1·068-1·627). Participants in the non-screening arm had a higher incidence of C trachomatis infections and symptomatic C trachomatis infections. There were no significant differences in N gonorrhoeae infections. Participants in the non-screening arm consumed significantly fewer antimicrobial drugs. No serious adverse events were reported.

INTERPRETATION

We failed to show that non-screening for N gonorrhoeae and C trachomatis is non-inferior to 3 × 3 screening in MSM and transgender women taking PrEP in Belgium. However, screening was associated with higher antibiotic consumption and had no effect on the incidence of N gonorrhoeae. Further research is needed to assess the benefits and harms of N gonorrhoeae and C trachomatis screening in this population.

FUNDING

Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre.

Homophobia in the provision of sexual health care in the UK

Decision making in the provision of health care is influenced by not only scientific evidence but also by the systems in which decisions are made. We consider national decisions made in the UK related to sexually transmitted infection prevention in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM), with three specific examples-HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis, mpox (formerly known as monkeypox) vaccination, and doxycycline prophylaxis. We suggest that entrenched societal and political homophobia results in unacceptable delays and limitations to accessing highly effective interventions and that these delays result in harm from preventable transmissions of HIV, mpox, and syphilis. GBMSM have been affected disproportionately by HIV, mpox, and bacterial sexually transmitted infections, and there is an ongoing unmet need for effective prevention. Denying access to public health interventions that meet these needs is unethical.

STI pathogens in the oropharynx: update on screening and treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The rise in antimicrobial resistance in several STI pathogens such as Neisseria gonorrhoeae has become a public health threat as only one first-line treatment remains. Reducing screening interval for gonorrhoea and chlamydia in high-prevalence populations has been proposed to address antimicrobial stewardship, but this remains controversial. This review aimed to revisit the epidemiology of infections at the oropharynx and review the current screening recommendations and treatment guidelines in different populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Emerging evidence suggests that the oropharynx is the primary anatomical site for gonorrhoea transmission but maybe not for chlamydia transmission. Most international guidelines recommend 3-monthly oropharyngeal gonorrhoea and chlamydia screening for high-prevalence populations (e.g. men who have sex with men) but not low-prevalence populations (e.g. heterosexuals) given the clinical and public health benefits of screening in low-prevalence populations are still unclear. Doxycycline remains the first-line treatment for oropharyngeal chlamydia in most guidelines. However, some countries have moved from dual therapy (ceftriaxone and azithromycin) to monotherapy (ceftriaxone) for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea treatment to address antimicrobial stewardship.

SUMMARY

The transmission of gonorrhoea and chlamydia is still not fully understood. Further work will be required to evaluate the benefits and harms of reducing screening in high-prevalence populations.