Using Epidemiology, Immunology, and Genomics to Study the Biology of Chlamydia trachomatis

Controversies and evidence on Chlamydia testing and treatment in asymptomatic women and men who have sex with men: a narrative review

Background

Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) is the most common bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) worldwide. CT is mainly asymptomatic. Test-and-treat strategies are widely implemented to prevent transmission and complications. Strategies are not without controversy in asymptomatic women and men who have sex with men (MSM). Concerns are emerging to test and treat asymptomatic persons for urogenital CT (‘Controversy 1’) and pharyngeal or rectal CT (‘Controversy 2’), whereby testing symptomatic persons is not under debate. Opposed views in CT treatment involve using azithromycin versus doxycycline (‘Controversy 3’). The objective of this review is to provide coverage of these public health and clinical controversies by reviewing the current scientific evidence.

Methods

A literature search was performed using PubMed for relevant publications between 2018 and September 2021, and iterative retrieval of additional relevant publications.

Results

Controversy 1. In women, the majority of asymptomatic CT are at the urogenital site, and detections mostly include viable CT. CT easily transmits to a partner and potentially also between the vaginal and rectal areas; the clinical impact of urogenital CT is established, although risks for adverse outcomes are uncertain. Wide-scale testing in asymptomatic women has not resulted in reduced prevalence. In MSM, evidence for the clinical impact of asymptomatic urogenital CT is lacking. Controversy 2. Rectal CT is common in women diagnosed with urogenital CT, but the clinical impact of asymptomatic rectal CT is uncertain. In MSM, rectal CT is common, and most CT infections are at the rectal site, yet the risk of longer term complications is unknown. In both sexes, pharyngeal CT is uncommon and has no documented clinical impact. Controversy 3. In the treatment of rectal CT, doxycycline has superior effectiveness to azithromycin. Evidence has also accumulated on the harms of test-and-treat strategies.

Conclusions

Current practices vary widely, from widescale test-and-treat approaches to more individual patient- and partner-level case management. Choosing which asymptomatic people to test at what anatomic site, and whether to test or not, requires an urgent (re-)definition of the goals of testing and treating asymptomatic persons. Treatment guidelines are shifting toward universal doxycycline use, and clinical practice now faces the challenge of implementation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07171-2.

Test-and-treat is a key strategy in the control of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT). We discuss recent controversies and present scientific evidence regarding urogenital, rectal, and pharyngeal CT test-and-treat strategies in women and in men who have sex with men (MSM). This should inform best practices for the prevention and management of the most common bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) worldwide.

Problems with Understanding Chlamydia trachomatis Immunology

The pay off for understanding Chlamydia. trachomatis (CT) immunology is the development of a vaccine. Two lines of research have contributed to our current understanding of CT immunology. The first is the Grayston model of type specific immunity and genus specific pathology which was elaborated by Caldwell and Morrison as the major outer membrane protein (MOMP) and heat shock protein 60 (HSP60) paradigm. The second is the murine model of C. muridarum (CM) infection which established the essential role of major histocompatibility complex class II and CD4 T cells in immunity. However neither approach has yielded a vaccine. I review these two lines of research and conclude with six problem areas in human CT immunology whose resolution may result in a vaccine.(122 words)

Changes in the prevalence of self-reported sexually transmitted bacterial infections from 2010 and 2017 in two large European samples of men having sex with men-is it time to re-evaluate STI-screening as a control strategy?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Many European countries reported increased numbers of syphilis, gonorrhoea and chlamydia diagnoses among men who have sex with men (MSM) in recent years. Behaviour changes and increased testing are thought to drive these increases.

METHODS

In 2010 and 2017, two large online surveys for MSM in Europe (EMIS-2010, EMIS-2017) collected self-reported data on STI diagnoses in the previous 12 months, diagnostic procedures, STI symptoms when testing, number of sexual partners, and sexual behaviours such as condom use during the last intercourse with a non-steady partner in 46 European countries. Multivariate regression models were used to analyse factors associated with diagnoses of syphilis, gonorrhoea/chlamydia, and respective diagnoses classified as symptomatic and asymptomatic. If applicable, they included country-level screening rates.

RESULTS

Questions on STI diagnoses and sexual behaviours were answered by 156,018 (2010) and 125,837 (2017) participants. Between 2010 and 2017, overall diagnoses with gonorrhoea/chlamydia and syphilis increased by 76% and 83% across countries. Increases were more pronounced for asymptomatic compared to symptomatic infections. The proportion of respondents screened and the frequency of screening grew considerably. Condomless anal intercourse with the last non-steady partner rose by 62%; self-reported partner numbers grew. Increased syphilis diagnoses were largely explained by behavioural changes (including more frequent screening). Gonorrhoea/chlamydia increases were mainly explained by more screening and a change in testing performance. A country variable representing the proportion of men screened for asymptomatic infection was positively associated with reporting symptomatic gonorrhoea/chlamydia, but not syphilis.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

The positive association of country-level screening rates with the proportion of symptomatic infections with gonorrhoea/chlamydia may indicate a paradoxical effect of screening on incidence of symptomatic infections. Treatment of asymptomatic men might render them more susceptible to new infections, while spontaneous clearance may result in reduced susceptibility. Before expanding screening programmes, evidence of the effects of screening and treatment is warranted.