HIV seroconversions among male non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis service users: a data linkage study

HIV Seroconversion in the Era of Pharmacologic Prevention: A Case-Control Study at a San Francisco STD Clinic

BACKGROUND

The comparative effectiveness of pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP and PEP) for men who have sex with men (MSM) is unclear.

SETTING

We conducted a case-control study of MSM who were initially HIV-uninfected during September 1, 2012-June 30, 2016 at San Francisco's only municipal sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) clinic.

METHODS

Each case was matched with up to 3 controls based on age, baseline visit date, and follow-up time. The primary dependent variable was HIV seroconversion; the primary independent variable was exposure to PrEP, PEP, or neither. Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Of 638 MSM (161 cases and 477 controls), 137 reported ever taking PrEP, 98 reported taking PEP-only, and 403 took neither. PrEP takers had more non-HIV sexually transmitted diseases during the analysis (72.3% vs. 55.1% vs. 42.4% P < 0.01) and were more likely to report receptive anal sex in the past 3 months (86.5% vs. 80.4% vs. 73.0%; P < 0.01). In the adjusted model, PrEP was associated with lower odds of HIV seroconversion (odds ratio 0.24; 95% confidence interval: 0.13 to 0.46) while PEP use had no effect on HIV acquisition compared with taking neither.

CONCLUSIONS

MSM who ever used PrEP demonstrated equal or higher sexual risk compared with those using neither PrEP nor PEP but had 76% lower odds of HIV seroconversion. MSM who used PEP but never PrEP were no less likely to seroconvert than those using neither. MSM should be offered PrEP. PEP users with ongoing risk of HIV infection should be connected to PrEP after PEP.

2016 United Kingdom national guideline on the sexual health care of men who have sex with men

This guideline is intended for use in UK Genitourinary medicine clinics and sexual health services but is likely to be of relevance in all sexual health settings, including general practice and Contraception and Sexual Health (CASH) services, where men who have sex with men (MSM) seek sexual health care or where addressing the sexual health needs of MSM may have public health benefits. For the purposes of this document, MSM includes all gay, bisexual and all other males who have sex with other males and both cis and trans men. This document does not provide guidance on the treatment of particular conditions where this is covered in other British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH) Guidelines but outlines best practice in multiple aspects of the sexual health care of MSM. Where prevention of sexually transmitted infections including HIV can be addressed as an integral part of clinical care, this is consistent with the concept of combination prevention and is included. The document is designed primarily to provide guidance on the direct clinical care of MSM but also makes reference to the design and delivery of services with the aim of supporting clinicians and commissioners in providing effective services. Methodology This document was produced in accordance with the guidance set out in the BASHH CEG's document 'Framework for guideline development and assessment' published in 2010 at http://www.bashh.org/guidelines and with reference to the Agree II instrument. Following the production of the updated framework in April 2015, the GRADE system for assessing evidence was adopted and the draft recommendations were regraded. Search strategy (see also Appendix 1) Ovid Medline 1946 to December 2014, Medline daily update, Embase 1974 to December 2014, Pubmed NeLH Guidelines Database, Cochrane library from 2000 to December 2014. Search language English only. The search for Section 3 was conducted on PubMed to December 2014. Priority was given to peer-reviewed papers published in scientific journals, although for many issues evidence includes conference abstracts listed on the Embase database. In addition, for 'Identification of problematic recreational drug and alcohol use' section and 'Sexual problems and dysfunctions in MSM' section, searches included PsycINFO. Methods Article titles and abstracts were reviewed and if relevant the full text article was obtained. Priority was given to randomised controlled trial and systematic review evidence, and recommendations made and graded on the basis of best available evidence. Piloting and feedback The first draft of the guideline was circulated to the writing group and to a small group of relevant experts, third sector partners and patient representatives who were invited to comment on the whole document and specifically on particular sections. The revised draft was reviewed by the CEG and then reviewed by the BASHH patient/public panel and posted on the BASHH website for public consultation. The final draft was piloted before publication. Guideline update The guidelines will be reviewed and revised in five years' time, 2022.

Optimal HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis Regimen Completion With Single Tablet Daily Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate/Emtricitabine Compared With More Frequent Dosing Regimens

STRUCTURE

The study evaluated elvitegravir/cobicistat/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC) ("Quad pill") for postexposure prophylaxis (PEP).

BACKGROUND

HIV-exposed individuals may benefit from PEP, but completion rates have been suboptimal because of regimen complexity and side effects. Newer antiretroviral combinations coformulated as single daily pills may optimize PEP adherence.

SETTING

One hundred HIV-uninfected individuals who presented to a Boston community health center after an acute HIV sexual exposure were enrolled and initiated PEP with the daily, single-pill combination Quad pill for a 28-day course.

METHODS

Side effects and medication completion rates from study participants were compared with historical controls who had used PEP regimens consisting of TDF/FTC daily and raltegravir twice daily, or earlier regimens of twice daily zidovudine (AZT)/lamivudine (3TC) and a protease inhibitor, using χ tests for independence.

RESULTS

Of the 100 participants who initiated the Quad pill for PEP after a high-risk sexual exposure, 71% completed the 28-day Quad pill regimen, which was significantly greater than historical controls who used TDF/FTC and raltegravir (57%, P < 0.05) or AZT/3TC plus a protease inhibitor (39%, P < 0.001). The most common side effects reported by Quad pill users were as follows: abdominal discomfort or pain, gas or bloating (42%), diarrhea (38%), fatigue (28%), nausea or vomiting (28%), headache (14%), or dizziness or lightheadedness (6%). Most symptoms were mild, limited, and did not result in medication discontinuation. No participants became HIV infected.

CONCLUSIONS

Fixed-dose combination of elvitegravir/cobicistat/TDF/FTC was safe and well tolerated for PEP, with higher regimen completion rates than more frequently dosed PEP regimens.

Prescription of Postexposure Prophylaxis for HIV-1 in the Emergency Room: Correct Transmission Risk Assessment Remains Challenging

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available about the accuracy of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) prescription in the emergency rooms. Here, we evaluated PEP prescription decision making with respect to the risk of sexual HIV transmission and the exposed person's fear vis-à-vis HIV.

METHODS

Using a risk assessment algorithm, we retrospectively evaluated the adequacy of PEP prescription for all persons presenting at the emergency room of the University Hospital Zurich after consensual sex from 2007 to 2013. We used logistic regression to identify factors that correlate with risk-concordant and risk-discordant decisions.

RESULTS

We documented 975 persons with a total of 1051 visits for PEP: 83% were men, 71% were Swiss, and 37% were men who have sex with men. In 74% of visits, the decisions were concordant with the risk evaluation algorithm (22% discordant, 4% unknown). In 61% (644/1051) PEP was prescribed; however, in 12% (76/644) the prescriptions were without indication of HIV transmission risk and were attributed to the exposed person's request. Importantly, in 10% (101/1051) of all visits, there were potential risks but PEP was not prescribed, either because of physician's decision or exposed person's refusal. The presence of the source partner strongly correlated with appropriately withholding PEP (adjusted odds ratio for giving PEP 0.05; 95% confidence interval: 0.03 to 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that 22% of PEP decisions were risk discordant because of exposed person's request, incorrect estimation of the sexual transmission risk by the physician, or exposed person's refusal to accept PEP. Emergency physicians may benefit from specialized risk assessment training and patients from education in HIV transmission risk awareness.

Differentiating Nonoccupational Postexposure Prophylaxis Seroconverters and Non-Seroconverters in a Community-Based Clinic in Los Angeles, California

BACKGROUND

Nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis (nPEP) is a 28-day regimen of antiretroviral medications taken within 72 hours of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) exposure to prevent HIV acquisition. Although nPEP has been recommended since 1998, few studies have analyzed the characteristics that distinguish nPEP failures (seroconverters) and successes (non-seroconverters).

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed all nPEP courses prompted by sexual exposure that were prescribed at the Los Angeles LGBT Center between March 2010 and July 2014. Fisher exact tests and logistic regressions were used to determine characteristics that distinguished nPEP seroconverters from non-seroconverters.

RESULTS

Of the nPEP courses administered, 1744 had a follow-up visit for HIV testing within 24 weeks of exposure and 17 individuals seroconverted. Seven reported a known re-exposure, 8 self-reported only condom-protected sex subsequent to the initial exposure, and 2 reported abstinence since the exposure. In multivariable analyses, seroconverters were more likely than non-seroconverters to report methamphetamine use, incomplete medication adherence, and nPEP initiation later in the 72-hour window.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis is an important emergency tool for HIV prevention. Our findings corroborate that timing of the initial nPEP dose is an important predictor of seroconversion. Although the current study did not offer the initial nPEP dose at the beginning of the visit, use of this fast-track dosing schedule will ensure that the first dose is taken as early as possible postexposure and may lower the likelihood for seroconversion. Furthermore, we recommend systematic screening for substance use because these individuals may be well suited for pre-exposure prophylaxis given their sustained risk.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for men who have sex with men in Europe: review of evidence for a much needed prevention tool

In many Western countries with good coverage of antiretroviral treatment (ART) programmes the annual number of HIV infections is still high and not (yet) declining among men who have sex with men (MSM). This might indicate that antiretroviral treatment roll-out alone will not turn around the course of the epidemic and that new, additional tools are needed. Antiretrovirals used as prevention tools for people not yet infected with HIV, such as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) could be such important additional tools. PrEP is a new type of biomedical prevention, which involves the use of antiretrovirals before, during and after (periods of) sexual exposure to HIV. In this review, we will focus on PrEP as a new prevention tool for MSM at high risk in Europe, including its evidence for effectiveness, challenges for implementation, ongoing European demonstration studies; as well as how PrEP relates to other existing prevention tools. In light of European Medicines Agency's recent recommendation for approval of PrEP we briefly review the potential implications.

Clinical challenges in HIV/AIDS: Hints for advancing prevention and patient management strategies

Acquired immune deficiency syndrome has been one of the most devastating epidemics of the last century. The current estimate for people living with the HIV is 36.9 million. Today, despite availability of potent and safe drugs for effective treatment, lifelong therapy is required for preventing HIV re-emergence from a pool of latently infected cells. However, recent evidence show the importance to expand HIV testing, to offer antiretroviral treatment to all infected individuals, and to ensure retention through all the cascade of care. In addition, circumcision, pre-exposure prophylaxis, and other biomedical tools are now available for included in a comprehensive preventive package. Use of all the available tools might allow cutting the HIV transmission in 2030. In this article, we review the status of the epidemic, the latest advances in prevention and treatment, the concept of treatment as prevention and the challenges and opportunities for the HIV cure agenda.

The Transition From Postexposure Prophylaxis to Preexposure Prophylaxis: An Emerging Opportunity for Biobehavioral HIV Prevention

Although some individuals who present for antiretroviral postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) had a 1-time exposure to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), others may be recurrently risky. Given that preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been shown to be efficacious, identification of those individuals who present for PEP who might benefit from PrEP is important to decrease HIV acquisition in high-risk individuals. While inclusion criteria for PrEP have been developed, there is a paucity of data to help clinicians determine which PEP users are at highest risk for HIV acquisition and therefore should be offered PrEP. We will discuss the rationale for using PrEP after PEP use, and will focus on the assessment of PEP users who may benefit from PrEP.

Longitudinal trends in HIV nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis use at a Boston community health center between 1997 and 2013

Secular trends in nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis (NPEP) use have not been well characterized. We performed a retrospective longitudinal study of 894 electronic medical records of NPEP users, mostly men who have sex with men, at a Boston community health center who presented between July 1997 and August 2013. NPEP use and condomless sexual exposures increased over time; 19.4% had multiple NPEP courses. Having an HIV-infected partner was associated with increased odds of regimen completion, and 3-drug regimens were associated with decreased odds of completion. Targeted adherence and risk-reduction counseling are warranted for select NPEP users at this center.

Subsequent HIV infection among men who have sex with men who used non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis at a Boston community health center: 1997-2013

Non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (NPEP) has been recommended to prevent HIV acquisition for nearly 20 years. However, limited behavioral and clinical outcome data exist after men who have sex with men (MSM) present for NPEP. We reviewed the electronic medical records of HIV-uninfected adults who presented for NPEP at a large community health center in Boston between July, 1997 and August, 2013. Data from 894 patients were analyzed, 88.1% of whom were MSM. Consensual unprotected sex was the most common reason for NPEP visits among MSM (64.2%), followed by condom failure (30.6%). The HIV serostatus of the partner was unknown for 64.4% of the MSM, positive with unknown treatment status for 18.1%, positive and not on treatment for 4.1%, and positive and on treatment for 13.4%. Thirty-nine patients subsequently became HIV-infected (4.4%), all of whom were MSM. The MSM-specific HIV incidence after NPEP use was 2.2 cases per 100 person-years. Incident HIV infection was associated with younger age (AHR=0.94; p=0.003), being Latino (AHR=2.44; p=0.044), and/or being African American (AHR=3.43; p=0.046). Repeated NPEP use was not associated with incident HIV infection (AHR=0.67; p=0.26). Younger MSM of color who access NPEP, in particular, may benefit from early HIV risk-reduction and pre-exposure prophylaxis counseling.

Queer as F**k: reaching and engaging gay men in sexual health promotion through social networking sites

Background

A growing number of health promotion interventions are taking advantage of the popularity and interactivity of new social media platforms to foster and engage communities for health promotion. However, few health promotion interventions using social networking sites (SNS) have been rigorously evaluated. "Queer as F**k"(QAF) began as pilot project in 2010 to deliver sexual health promotion via short "webisodes" on SNS to gay men. Now in its fifth season, QAF is among the few published examples internationally to demonstrate the sexual health promotion potential of SNS.

Objective

The objective of this evaluation is to assess reach, interactivity, and engagement generated by QAF to inform future health interventions and evaluations using SNS.

Methods

We undertook a mixed method process evaluation using an uncontrolled longitudinal study design that compared multiple measurements over time to assess changes in reach and engagement. We adapted evaluation methods from the health promotion, information systems, and creative spheres. We incorporated online usage statistics, interviews informed by user diary-scrapbooks, and user focus groups to assess intervention reach and engagement.

Results

During Series 1-3 (April 2010 to April 2011), 32 webisodes were posted on the QAF Facebook and YouTube pages. These webisodes attracted over 30,000 views; ranging from 124-3092 views per individual episode. By April 2011, the QAF Facebook page had 2929 predominantly male fans. Interview and focus group participants supported the balance of education and entertainment. They endorsed the narrative "soap opera" format as an effective way to deliver sexual health messages in an engaging, informative, and accessible manner that encouraged online peer discussion of sexual health and promoted community engagement.

Conclusions

QAF offers a successful example of exploiting the reach, interactivity, and engagement potential of SNS; findings from this process evaluation provide a model to inform the delivery and evaluation of future health promotion interventions on SNS.

Non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis in Victoria, Australia: responding to high rates of re-presentation and low rates of follow-up

In Australia, the non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis service in Victoria (VNPEPS) maintains a database of non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (NPEP) use throughout the state. Through the database the service can monitor and respond to patterns of NPEP presentation, re-presentation and follow-up as well as those who test positive for HIV. We describe a cohort of NPEP individuals from the commencement of the service to 31 December 2009. During this time, 1864 individuals presented for NPEP on 2396 occasions. The majority (85%) were men who have sex with men (MSM) presenting after receptive anal intercourse (56.1%). Repeat NPEP presentations were high (17.5%) and follow-up testing at week 12 post-NPEP was low (34%). Twenty-two patients (1.2%) tested positive for HIV at baseline presentation and six patients seroconverted to HIV during follow-up. The VNPEPS has initiated strategies to encourage behaviour change for those who re-present for NPEP, and to improve rates of week 12 follow-up.