Sexual Partner Concurrency Among Partners Reported by MSM with Recent HIV Infection
We examined concurrency among sexual partners reported by men who have sex with men (MSM) with recent (acute or early) HIV infection in San Diego, California (2002–2015). Partners overlapping in time in the past 3 months were considered concurrent. Logistic generalized linear mixed models were used to identify factors associated with concurrency at the partner-level. 56% (388/699) of partners were concurrent to ≥1 other partner. The odds of concurrency were higher among partners >10 years younger than the participant (vs. within 10 years of age) [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 2.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09–4.52], longer term partners (AOR per month = 1.02, 95% CI 1.01–1.03), and partners met online (AOR = 1.56, 95% CI 0.98–2.48). Concurrency is common among partners of recently HIV-infected MSM. Tailored HIV prevention strategies for MSM with older partners, longer term partners, and partners met online may help minimize the potential impact of concurrency on HIV transmission.
KeywordsConcurrency Acute and early HIV infection HIV transmission MSM
This work was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse [Grant No. K01 DA040543 to H.A.P.]; the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [Grant Nos. U01 AI43638, R01 HD083042, R01 MH100974, R24 AI106039, P01 AI074621, P30 AI035214]; the California HIV Research Program [Grant No. RN07-SD-702]; and the California Collaborative Treatment Group [Grant No. El11-SD-005]. M.Y.K. receives funding to the institution and has served on an advisory board to Gilead Sciences.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflicts of interest
The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare.
UCSD’s Institutional Review Board approved the study protocol. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- 1.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2014. HIV Surveillance Report 2015;26. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/library/reports/surveillance/cdc-hiv-surveillance-report-us.pdf. Accessed 26 Aug 2016.
- 2.UNAIDS. Consultation on concurrent sexual partnerships: recommendations from a meeting of the UNAIDS reference group on estimates, modelling and projecion held in Nairobi Kenya. 2009. http://www.epidem.org/sites/default/files/reports/Concurrency_meeting_recommendations_Updated_Nov_2009.pdf. Accessed 10 Nov 2015.
- 4.Morris M, Goodreau SM, Moody J. Sexual networks, concurrency, and STD/HIV. In: Holmes KK, Sparling PF, Stamm WE, Piot P, Wasserheit J, editors. Sexually transmitted diseases. 4th ed. New York: McGraw Hill; 2008.Google Scholar
- 6.Rosenberg ES, Khosropour CM, Sullivan PS. High prevalence of sexual concurrency and concurrent unprotected anal intercourse across racial/ethnic groups among a national, Web-based study of men who have sex with men in the United States. Sex Transm Dis. 2012;39(10):741–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 14.Rosenberg ES, Rothenberg RB, Kleinbaum DG, Stephenson RB, Sullivan PS. The implications of respondent concurrency on sex partner risk in a national, web-based study of men who have sex with men in the United States. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2013;63(4):514–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 39.Cooper A. Sex and the internet: a guidebook for clinicians. New York: Brunner-Routledge; 2002.Google Scholar