Condomless Anal Sex Among HIV-Positive Men Who Have Sex with Men: Biomedical Context Matters
Data from Medical Monitoring Project was used to determine if partner type is associated with condomless anal sex (CAS) and insertive condomless anal sex (ICAS) among HIV-positive men who have sex with men. Participants reported HIV status and PrEP use of up to five anal sex partners. Partner type was categorized as HIV-positive, HIV status unknown, HIV-negative on PrEP or HIV-negative not on PrEP. To account for correlation of multiple observations per participant, generalized estimating equations were used to calculate adjusted prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals of CAS and ICAS. Condom use during anal sex and insertive anal sex varied based on partner type. There was a higher prevalence of CAS and ICAS in partnerships with HIV-positive partners or HIV-negative partners on PrEP compared to HIV-negative partners not on PrEP.
KeywordsMen who have sex with men Pre-exposure prophylaxis HIV serosorting Condom use Anal sex
Medical Monitoring Project, CDC, Grant Number # NU62PS004970-02-00.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflicts of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
In accordance with the ethical standards of US Federal Code Title 45 Part 46 and the non-research determination made by four San Francisco institutional review boards in 2012, the Medical Monitoring Project was conducted as a supplemental HIV surveillance activity with a non-research determination during the 2014 and 2015 data collection cycles nationally and in San Francisco.
All participants were given a patient information sheet, similar to an informed consent, prior to the interview and granted permission for the medical record abstraction.
- 2.Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adults and Adolescents. Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in HIV-1 Infected Adults and Adolescents. Department of Health and Human Services; 2012. http://www.aidsinfo.nih.gov/contentfiles/lvguidelines/adultandadolescentgl.pdf.
- 7.Brooks RA, Landovitz RJ, Kaplan RL, Lieber E, Lee SJ, Barkley TW. Sexual risk behaviors and acceptability of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among HIV-negative gay and bisexual men in serodiscordant relationships: a mixed methods study. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2012;26(2):87–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 9.Liu AY, Vittinghoff E, Chillag K, Mayer K, Thompson M, Grohskopf L, et al. Sexual risk behavior among HIV-uninfected men who have sex with men (MSM) participating in a tenofovir pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) randomized trial in the United States. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2013;64(1):87.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 12.McCormack S, Dunn DT, Desai M, Dolling DI, Gafos M, Gilson R, et al. Pre-exposure prophylaxis to prevent the acquisition of HIV-1 infection (PROUD): effectiveness results from the pilot phase of a pragmatic open-label randomised trial. Lancet. 2016;387:53–60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 17.McNaghten AD, Wolfe MI, Onorato I, Nakashima AK, Valdiserri RO, Mokotoff E, et al. Improving the representativeness of behavioral and clinical surveillance for persons with HIV in the United States: the rationale for developing a population-based approach. PLoS ONE. 2007;2(6):e550.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 19.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Behavioral and Clinical Characteristics of Persons Receiving Medical Care for HIV Infection—Medical Monitoring Project, United States, 2013 Cycle (June 2013–May 2014). HIV Surveillance Special Report 16; January 2016. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/library/reports/surveillance/#panel2.
- 20.Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Distinguishing Public Health Research and Public Health Nonresearch. 2010. http:/www.cdc.gov/od/science/integrity/docs/cdc-policy-distinguishing-publichealth-research-nonresearch.pdf. Accessed 4 June 2013.
- 21.Protection of Human Subjects, US Federal Code Title 45 Part 46. 2009. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.html.
- 24.US Public Health Service (PHS) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Preexposure Prophylaxis for the Prevention of HIV Infection in the United States—2014 Clinical Practice Guideline. 2014. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/prepguidelines2014.pdf.
- 29.Hughes A, Scheer S. Congruence between self-report and medical record CD4 lymphocyte and HIV viral load test results among HIV-infected patients in care. In: CSTE Conference. Omaha, NE, USA; 2012. Abstract 105.Google Scholar
- 30.HIV Epidemiology Section, San Francisco Department of Public Health. HIV Epidemiology Annual Report 2015. San Francisco: San Francisco Department of Public Health September 2016; 1–91.Google Scholar
- 31.San Francisco Department of Public Health. San Francisco Sexually Transmitted Disease Annual Summary, 2014. San Francisco Department of Public Health, San Francisco, California. December 2015; 1–130.Google Scholar
- 35.Weber S, Buchbinder S. San Francisco Getting to Zero Consortium. The Getting to Zero San Francisco consortium: early results. In: AIDS 2016. Durban, South Africa; 2016. Abstract WEPEE609.Google Scholar
- 36.Bush S, Magnuson D, Rawlings M, Hawkins T, McCallister S, Mera Giler R. Racial characteristics of FTC/TDF for pre-exposure prophylaxis users in the US. In: ICAAC. Boston, MA, USA; 2016. Abstract 2651.Google Scholar
- 38.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV Surveillance Report, 2014. vol. 26; November 2015. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/library/reports/surveillance/.