"Slam Sex" - Sexualized Injecting Drug Use ("SIDU") Amongst Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM)-A Scoping Review

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among people who use drugs: a qualitative scoping review of implementation determinants and change methods

Implementation of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV transmission is suboptimal in the United States, particularly among people who use drugs (PWUD). PrEP research among PWUD is scarce, and the factors that impact implementation are largely unknown. Therefore, we conducted a scoping review of implementation determinants (i.e., barriers and facilitators), as well as the change methods (implementation strategies and adjunctive interventions) that have been evaluated to increase PrEP implementation and use among PWUD. We identified 32 peer-reviewed articles assessing determinants and five that evaluated change methods. Determinants were coded using the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which is an established framework to understand the multilevel barriers and facilitators associated with implementation. Findings indicate that most research was conducted among PrEP recipients (i.e., patients), focusing on awareness and willingness to use PrEP, with less focus on factors impacting clinicians and service delivery systems. Moreover, very few change methods have been evaluated to improve clinician adoption and adherence to CDC guidelines for PrEP provision and/or recipient uptake and adherence to PrEP. Future research is needed that focuses on factors impacting implementation from a clinician standpoint as well as innovative change methods to increase PrEP awareness, reach, adoption, and sustained adherence to guidelines. Implementation Science offers a wealth of knowledge to speed up the effort to end the HIV epidemic in the United States.

Exploring practices to enhance benefits and reduce risks of chemsex among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men: A meta-ethnography

BACKGROUND

Chemsex is the intentional combining of specific drugs with sex, primarily by gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM), to enhance intimacy, pleasure, and prolong sexual sessions. Practices vary across geographic and social settings. Participants report benefits and risks of chemsex. Studies have previously reviewed chemsex practices and harm reduction interventions separately. This review aims to examine both together by describing and understanding practices that men employ to navigate the perceived benefits and risks of chemsex.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic meta-ethnographic review of published qualitative literature, screening titles, abstracts, and full texts on defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Using reciprocal and refutational translation techniques, we analysed study participants' (first-order) and researchers' (second-order) accounts of benefit-enhancing and risk-reducing chemsex practices. Finally, we employed line-of-argument synthesis techniques to develop our own higher-level interpretations (third-order constructs) of these chemsex practices.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 6356 records, from which, we included 23 articles in our review. Most studies were conducted in high-income Western countries. Across studies, participants acted at the individual, interpersonal, and community levels to enhance benefits and reduce risks, which made up our third-order constructs. Eight themes emerged from first- and second-order constructs to describe these practices, which included personal preparation, personal boundaries, biomedical measures, structured use of drugs, leaning on partners, injecting practices, group organising, watching out for others, and teaching and learning. Contextual factors like trust, agency, access, stigma, and setting moderated whether and how participants engaged in these practices, and if practices enhanced benefits or reduced risks.

CONCLUSION

Health promotion programmes and research focused on chemsex must account for the benefits and the risks that GBMSM associate with this type of sexualised drug use and target the moderating factors that shape the practices they employ to navigate these benefits and risks.

Conceptions of sexual health by gay men living with HIV in serodifferent couples in Montreal, Canada: results from a qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Gay, bisexual, and other men (GBM) who have sex with men living with HIV in serodifferent couples (one partner living with HIV, the other HIV-negative) may encounter unique sexual health challenges. This study aimed to explore their definition of sexual health that could improve service provision.

METHODS

We interviewed 10 gay-identified men living with HIV from 2017 to 2019 as part of CTNPT013, a study on the sexual health of HIV serodifferent GBM couples conducted at two HIV-specialised clinics in Montreal, Canada. Participants partook in semi-structured interviews on the meaning of sexual health. We performed a content analysis of interview transcripts, coding them according to the 10 dimensions of Robinson's Sexual Health Model.

RESULTS

Mean age of interviewees was 35.4years (s.d.,10.2; range, 20-53). Every dimension of Robinson's model was spontaneously evoked, except for body image and spirituality. All men indicated intimacy/relationships (e.g. sexual agreements) and sexual health care/safer sex (e.g. HIV management, risk behaviours) as relevant aspects of sexual health. Other dimensions included: positive sexuality (n =7), such as pleasure and enjoyment during sex; talking about sex (n =5), which mainly concerned HIV disclosure; sexual functioning (n =4); challenges to sexual health (n =3), including substance abuse; and culture/sexual identity (n =3). Two participants (n =2) cited masturbation/fantasy.

CONCLUSIONS

This study emphasises the multi-faceted nature of sexual health for gay men with HIV in serodifferent couples and the pivotal roles of relationships, HIV, risk management (e.g. via health care, knowledge), and positive sexual experiences. These dimensions could be considered in sexual health promotion interventions targeting this population.

Impact of HCV Testing and Treatment on HCV Transmission Among Men Who Have Sex With Men and Who Inject Drugs in San Francisco: A Modelling Analysis

BACKGROUND

Men who have sex with men who ever injected drugs (ever MSM-IDU) carry a high hepatitis C virus (HCV) burden. We estimated whether current HCV testing and treatment in San Francisco can achieve the 2030 World Health Organization (WHO) HCV elimination target on HCV incidence among ever MSM-IDU.

METHODS

A dynamic HCV/HIV transmission model among MSM was calibrated to San Francisco data, including HCV antibody (15.5%, 2011) and HIV prevalence (32.8%, 2017) among ever MSM-IDU. MSM had high HCV testing (79%-86% ever tested, 2011-2019) and diagnosed MSM had high HCV treatment (65% ever treated, 2018). Following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related lockdowns, HCV testing and treatment decreased by 59%.

RESULTS

Among all MSM, 43% of incident HCV infections in 2022 were IDU-related. Among ever MSM-IDU in 2015, HCV incidence was 1.2/100 person-years (95% credibility interval [CrI], 0.8-1.6). Assuming COVID-19-related declines in HCV testing/treatment persist until 2030, HCV incidence among ever MSM-IDU will decrease by 84.9% (95% CrI, 72.3%-90.8%) over 2015-2030. This decline is largely attributed to HCV testing and treatment (75.8%; 95% CrI, 66.7%-89.5%). Slightly greater decreases in HCV incidence (94%-95%) are projected if COVID-19 disruptions recover by 2025 or 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

We estimate that HCV incidence will decline by >80% over 2015-2030 among ever MSM-IDU in San Francisco, achieving the WHO target.

Hepatitis C antibody prevalence and active hepatitis C infection in HIV-negative gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in Barcelona and Madrid, Spain (March 2018-March 2021)

OBJECTIVES

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) has been recognized as a sexually transmitted infection (STI) in HIV-positive men who have sex with men (MSM), with an increased notification in HIV-negative MSM. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of HCV antibody and active HCV infection in HIV-negative gay, bisexual, and other MSM (GBMSM), and their characteristics, in Barcelona and Madrid, from March 2018 to March 2021.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study conducted on 3548 HIV-undiagnosed GBMSM, across four HIV/STI testing centers. Respondents submitted an online, self-administered questionnaire after consultation, which collected information on sociodemographics, sexual health history, HCV knowledge, and substance consumption. Prevalence of HCV antibodies was determined by a reactive result in a rapid anti-HCV test or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), while active HCV infection was determined by participants who were also positive on an HCV-RNA test. Crude and adjusted Poisson analyses with robust variance are presented for both prevalence and active infection.

RESULTS

In total, 97.6% of participants (n = 3463) were HIV-negative. Of those, 18 were found to have HCV antibodies (0.52%), of which nine (0.26%) were also HCV-RNA positive. Those with HCV antibodies were associated to have lived with an HCV (+) person (adjusted prevalence ratio [APR]: 7.84, [95% confidence interval: 2.50-24.53]), using injectable drugs for sex (APR: 6.92, [1.20-39.79]) and testing positive for an STI in the previous year (APR: 4.06, [1.09-15.12]). Presenting an active infection was strongly associated with a previous HCV diagnosis (APR: 100.82 [22.16-458.76]), sexualized injectable drug use (APR: 17.53 [2.70-113.76]), and sharing douching material (APR: 7.45, [2.12-25.95]).

CONCLUSION

Sexual practices with a higher risk of bleeding and sexualized drug use, particularly sexualized injectable drug use, were associated with higher rates of HCV diagnosis in GBMSM. Identifying these practices during consultation, contact tracing new cases and regularly testing those with a previous history of HCV, will facilitate HCV eradication.

Does sexuality matter? A cross-sectional study of drug use, social injecting, and access to injection-specific care among men who inject drugs in Melbourne, Australia

BACKGROUND

Gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) are overrepresented in cohorts of people who inject drugs. GBMSM's substance use is usually explored in the context of its contribution to sexual risk. We examined drug use practices, connectedness to other people who inject drugs, peer-to-peer injecting, and access to care among men who inject drugs in Melbourne, Australia. We aim to describe similarities and differences in these parameters for GBMSM and other men.

METHODS

Data were drawn from a prospective cohort study of people who inject drugs conducted in Melbourne, Australia, since 2009. This cross-sectional study used data collected between 2016 and 2021. Descriptive statistics were used to assess differences between GBMSM and other men.

RESULTS

Of 525 men who injected drugs over the study period, 48 (9%) identified as gay or bisexual, or reported sex with other men in the past 12 months. GBMSM and other men reported similar socio-demographics, drug practices (age of injecting initiation, most injected drug, peer-to-peer injecting, receptive syringe sharing) and access to injecting-specific care (drug treatment, source of needle-syringes). A significantly greater percentage of GBMSM reported past 12-month hepatitis C testing (69% vs. 52%, p = 0.028) and preferring methamphetamine (31% vs. 16%, p = 0.022). A higher percentage of GBMSM reported knowing > 50 other people who inject drugs (46% vs. 37%), but this difference was not statistically significant. Both groups primarily obtained injecting equipment from needle-syringe programs; a minority had accessed injecting-specific primary care.

CONCLUSION

Men who injected drugs in this cohort and those who identified as GBMSM reported similar drug and health-seeking practices. The higher prevalence of methamphetamine injecting among GBMSM may warrant different harm reduction support for this group. Health promotion should utilise opportunities to connect men who inject drugs in Melbourne to injecting-specific primary health care.

Sexualized drug injection among men who have sex with men in Madrid and Barcelona as the first episode of drug injecting

BACKGROUND

We estimate the prevalence of drug injection, the variables associated with having ever injected and the proportion of ever injectors whose first drug injection was for having sex; we describe the first drug injection episode, analyze the drugs most frequently injected and estimate the prevalence of risky injecting behaviors.

METHODS

The participants were 3387 MSM without a previous HIV diagnosis attending four HIV/STI diagnosis services in Madrid and Barcelona. Lifetime prevalence and prevalence ratios (PRs) by different factors were calculated using Poisson regression models with robust variance. We compared the characteristics of first drug injection episode, lifetime injection and risky injecting behaviors of those whose first injection was for sex (FIS) with those whose was not (non-FIS).

RESULTS

Lifetime prevalence of injection was 2.1% (CI 1.7-2.7). In the multivariate analysis, it was strongly associated with having been penetrated by more than five men in the last 12 months (aPR = 10.4; CI 2.5-43.4) and having met most of their partners at private parties (aPR = 7.5; CI 4.5-12.3), and less strongly with other factors. Of those who had ever injected drugs, 81.9% injected for sex the first time they injected drugs (FIS). At first injection, FIS participants had a mean age of 31 years, 62.7% used mephedrone and 32.2% methamphetamine on that occasion. Of this FIS group 39.0% had ever shared drugs or equipment and 82.6% had always shared for sex. Some 30.8% of non-FIS reported having also injected drugs for sex later on.

CONCLUSIONS

Only two out of a hundred had ever injected, most to have sex and with frequent drug or injecting equipment sharing. Injecting for sex is the most common first episode of drug injection and is the most efficient risky behavior for the transmission of HIV, hepatitis B or C and other blood-borne infections. MSM participating in private parties should be considered a priority group for prevention policies.