Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Predictors of Event-Driven Regimen Choice in Current PrEP Users and Sexual Behavior Characteristics of MSM Receiving Sexual Health Services in New York City

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
AIDS and Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While daily PrEP is undeniably effective, broad-based adoption remains low. Non-daily PrEP modalities, like event-driven PrEP (ED PrEP), offer an efficient way to deliver PrEP’s protection to priority populations. We carried out an at-home survey with patients receiving sexual health services in a LGBTQ-clinic in New York (n = 147). Participants answered questions on ED PrEP awareness and preferences, sexual behavior, and sexual preparatory practices. Only 50% of our sample were aware of ED PrEP, about 30% met eligibility for ED PrEP, and 35% chose ED PrEP as a good HIV prevention option for them. In a robust Poisson model (n = 128), endorsement of ED PrEP as a good prevention choice was significantly more common in participants who were uninsured, preferred taking PrEP only when needed, and those who had concerns about side-effects. Furthermore, participants reported many sexual behaviors patterns and preparatory practices compatible with use of ED PrEP.

Resumen

Si bien la PrEP diaria es innegablemente efectiva, la adopción generalizada sigue siendo baja. Las modalidades de PrEP no diarias, como la PrEP impulsada por eventos (ED PrEP), ofrecen una manera eficiente de brindar protección de PrEP a las poblaciones prioritarias. Realizamos una encuesta a domicilio con pacientes que recibían servicios de salud sexual en una clínica LGBTQ en Nueva York (n = 147). Los participantes respondieron preguntas sobre su conocimiento y sus preferencias de la ED PrEP, su comportamiento sexual, y sus prácticas de preparación sexual. Solo el 50% de nuestra muestra conocía la ED PrEP, alrededor del 30% cumplía con los requisitos para la ED PrEP, y el 35% eligió ED PrEP como una buena opción de prevención del HIV para ellos. En un modelo robusto de Poisson (n = 128), la aprobación de la ED PrEP como una buena opción de prevención fue significativamente más común en los participantes que no tenían seguro, preferían tomar la PrEP solo cuando era necesario, y aquellos que tenían preocupaciones sobre los efectos secundarios. Además, los participantes informaron muchos patrones de comportamiento sexual y prácticas preparatorias compatibles con el uso de ED PrEP.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. CDC. Estimated HIV incidence and prevalence in the United States, 2014–2018. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report. Atlanta: CDC; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Grant RM, Anderson PL, Mcmahan V, Liu A, Amico KR, Mehrotra M, et al. Uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis, sexual practices, and HIV incidence in men and transgender women who have sex with men: a cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14(9):820–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Liu AY, Cohen SE, Vittinghoff E, Anderson PL, Doblecki-Lewis S, Bacon O, et al. Preexposure prophylaxis for HIV infection integrated with municipal- and community-based sexual health services. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(1):75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 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(10013):53–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. CDC. Preexposure prophylaxis for the prevention of HIV infection in the United States—2017 update: a clinical practice guideline. Atlanta: CDC website; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Smith D, Van Handel M, Grey J. By race/ethnicity, blacks have highest number needing PrEP in the United States, 2015. Paper presented at the Conference on retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections 2018.

  7. AVAC. United States—PrEPWatch [Internet]. 2018.

  8. Elion RA, Kabiri M, Mayer KH, Wohl DA, Cohen J, Beaubrun AC, et al. Estimated impact of targeted pre-exposure prophylaxis: strategies for men who have sex with men in the United States. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(9):1592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Patel R, Singh S, Farag C, et al. Out-of-pocket costs impede PrEP use among young MSM in the private healthcare system. Presented at Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections 2018.

  10. Golub SA. PrEP stigma: implicit and explicit drivers of disparity. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2018;15(2):190–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Touger R, Wood BR. A review of telehealth innovations for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2019;16(1):113–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Rendina HJ, Whitfield THF, Grov C, Starks TJ, Parsons JT. Distinguishing hypothetical willingness from behavioral intentions to initiate HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP): findings from a large cohort of gay and bisexual men in the U.S. Social Sci Med. 2017;172:115–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ellison J, Van Den Berg JJ, Montgomery MC, Tao J, Pashankar R, Mimiaga MJ, et al. Next-generation HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis preferences among men who have sex with men taking daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis. AIDS Patient Care STDs. 2019;33(11):482–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Holt M, Murphy DA. Individual versus community-level risk compensation following preexposure prophylaxis of HIV. Am J Public Health. 2017;107(10):1568–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kibengo FM, Ruzagira E, Katende D, Bwanika AN, Bahemuka U, Haberer JE, et al. Safety, adherence and acceptability of intermittent tenofovir/emtricitabine as HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among HIV-uninfected Ugandan volunteers living in HIV-serodiscordant relationships: a randomized, clinical trial. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(9):e74314.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Molina J-M, Capitant C, Spire B, Pialoux G, Cotte L, Charreau I, et al. On-demand preexposure prophylaxis in men at high risk for HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(23):2237–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Molina J-M, Charreau I, Spire B, Cotte L, Chas J, Capitant C, et al. Efficacy, safety, and effect on sexual behaviour of on-demand pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV in men who have sex with men: an observational cohort study. Lancet HIV. 2017;4(9):e402–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Grant RM, Mannheimer S, Hughes JP, Hirsch-Moverman Y, Loquere A, Chitwarakorn A, et al. Daily and nondaily oral preexposure prophylaxis in men and transgender women who have sex with men: the human immunodeficiency virus prevention trials network 067/ADAPT study. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66(11):1712–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Molina J-M, Capitant C, Spire B, Pialoux, G., Chidiac C, et al. On demand PrEP with oral TDF-FTC in MSM: results of the ANRS Ipergay trial. Paper presented at the Conference on retroviruses and opportunistic infections 2015.

  20. Siguier M, Mera R, Pialoux G, Ohayon M, Cotte L, Valin N, et al. First year of pre-exposure prophylaxis implementation in France with daily or on-demand tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019;74(9):2752–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Reyniers T, Nöstlinger C, Laga M, De Baetselier I, Crucitti T, Wouters K, et al. Choosing between daily and event-driven pre-exposure prophylaxis: results of a Belgian PrEP demonstration project. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2018;79(2):186–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zimmermann HM, Eekman SW, Achterbergh RC, Schim Van Der Loeff MF, Prins M, Vries HJ, et al. Motives for choosing, switching and stopping daily or event-driven pre-exposure prophylaxis—a qualitative analysis. J Int AIDS Soc. 2019;22(10):e25389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Vaccher SJ, Gianacas C, Templeton DJ, Poynten IM, Haire BG, Ooi C, et al. Baseline preferences for daily, event-driven, or periodic HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among gay and bisexual men in the PRELUDE demonstration project. Front Public Health. 2017;5:341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sewell WC, Powell VE, Mayer KH, Ochoa A, Krakower DS, Marcus JL. Nondaily use of HIV preexposure prophylaxis in a large online survey of primarily men who have sex with men in the United States. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2020;84(2):182–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Shrestha R, Karki P, Altice FL, Dubov O, Fraenkel L, Huedo-Medina T, et al. Measuring acceptability and preferences for implementation of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) using conjoint analysis: an application to primary HIV prevention among high risk drug users. AIDS Behav. 2018;22(4):1228–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dubov A, Ogunbajo A, Altice FL, Fraenkel L. Optimizing access to PrEP based on MSM preferences: results of a discrete choice experiment. AIDS Care. 2019;31(5):545–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Golub SA, Gamarel KE, Rendina HJ, Surace A, Lelutiu-Weinberger CL. From efficacy to effectiveness: facilitators and barriers to PrEP acceptability and motivations for adherence among MSM and transgender women in New York City. AIDS Patient Care STDs. 2013;27(4):248–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Cohen SE, Kelley CF. Is the United States ready for event-driven human immunodeficiency virus preexposure prophylaxis? Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(2):256–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Molina J-M, Ghosn J, Algarte-Genin M, Rojas-Castro D, Beniguel L, Pialoux G, et al. Incidence of HIV-infection with daily or on-demand PrEP with TDF/FTC in Paris area—update from the ANRS Prevenir Study. In: 10th IAS Conference on HIV Science: International AIDS Society. Hoboken: Wiley; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  30. World Health Organization. Technical brief: what’s the 2+ 1+ 1? Event-driven oral pre-exposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV for men who have sex with men: update to WHO’s recommendation on oral PrEP. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. “On-Demand” dosing for PrEP: guidance for medical providers. New York City: Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Department of Health—Population Health Division; Important HIV prevention and treatment updates for San Francisco providers. San Francisco: Department of Health—Population Health Division; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Department of Health. PrEP 2-1-1: “On-Demand” pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for sexual intercourse. California: Department of Health; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Dimitrov D, Moore JR, Wood D, Mitchell KM, Li M, Hughes JP, et al. Predicted effectiveness of daily and nondaily preexposure prophylaxis for men who have sex with men based on sex and pill-taking patterns from the human immuno virus prevention trials network 067/ADAPT study. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(2):249–55.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Marks SJ, Merchant RC, Clark MA, Liu T, Rosenberger JG, Bauermeister J, et al. Potential healthcare insurance and provider barriers to pre-exposure prophylaxis utilization among young men who have sex with men. AIDS Patient Care STDs. 2017;31(11):470–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Spiegelman D, Easy SAS. Calculations for risk or prevalence ratios and differences. Am J Epidemiol. 2005;162(3):199–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. SAS Institute Incorporated. SAS (Version 9.4). Cary: SAS Institute Incorporated; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Doblecki-Lewis S, Butts S, Botero V, Klose K, Cardenas G, Feaster D. A randomized study of passive versus active PrEP patient navigation for a heterogeneous population at risk for HIV in South Florida. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care (JIAPAC). 2019;18:232595821984884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to all the staff working at the sexual health clinic at Callen-Lorde Community Health Center. A special thanks to Esther Blanchard, Lara Comstock, Asa Radix, and Carlos Gomar.

Funding

This research was supported by R01MH106380 (Golub, PI).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pedro B. Carneiro.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. All procedures for this study were reviewed by the CUNY Integrated Institutional Review Board.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carneiro, P.B., Rincon, C. & Golub, S. Predictors of Event-Driven Regimen Choice in Current PrEP Users and Sexual Behavior Characteristics of MSM Receiving Sexual Health Services in New York City. AIDS Behav 25, 2410–2418 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-021-03203-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-021-03203-1

Keywords

Navigation