Objectives: DREAM-01 was an open label, dose-escalation and variable osmolarity study to identify a tenofovir HIV-prevention douche/enema that could achieve protective colon tissue cell concentrations and high acceptability. To assess impact on sexual enjoyment, iso-osmolar and hypo-osmolar placebo douches were provided for at-home use before receptive anal sex (RAS).
Methods: Eighteen HIV-uninfected men who have RAS were administered three tenofovir douches at the research clinic: Product A, an iso-osmolar dose; Product B, an iso-osmolar escalation dose; and Product C, a hypo-osmolar escalation dose. Following Products A and C, participants were given a saline douche of matching osmolarity to use at home before RAS. Participants reported acceptability via a computer-assisted self-interview and in-depth interview in this mixed-methods study.
Results: All three products were rated acceptable by 17 (95%) of the participants. A majority (94%) would be likely or very likely to use any of the three products before RAS. Of those who used the saline douches before RAS and then rated their sexual enjoyment, most reported that their sexual enjoyment was not affected. Interview data revealed that participants found the product easy to incorporate into their regular routine, but would prefer to use more liquid for cleansing.
Conclusions: These findings indicate that the hypo-osmolar Product C, which also provides the most rapid delivery of tenofovir for HIV prevention, is acceptable for future safety trials and that our sample reports high likelihood of using a rectal microbicide douche for HIV prevention. Our findings support continued pursuit of a tenofovir rectal microbicide douche.
Trial registration number: NCT02750540.
Objectives: Partner notification (PN) is a key component of sexually transmitted infection control. British Association for Sexual Health and HIV guidelines now recommend partner-centred PN outcomes using a five-category partner classification (established, new, occasional, one-off, sex worker). We evaluated the reporting of partner-centred PN outcomes in two contrasting UK sexual health services.
Methods: Using the electronic patient records of 40 patients with a positive gonorrhoea test and 180 patients with a positive chlamydia test, we extracted PN outcomes for the five most recent sexual contacts within the appropriate lookback period.
Results: 180 patients with chlamydia reported 262 partners: 220 were contactable (103 established, 9 new, 43 occasional, 52 one-off, 13 unknown/unrecorded). 40 patients with gonorrhoea reported 88 partners: 53 were contactable (7 established, 1 new, 14 occasional, 10 one-off and 21 unknown/not recorded). No sex worker partners were reported. Most established partners of people with chlamydia (96/103) or gonorrhoea (7/7) were notified but fewer (60/103 and 6/7, respectively) attended for testing. Of those, 39 had a positive chlamydia test and two had a positive gonorrhoea test. For both chlamydia and gonorrhoea, most occasional and new partners were reported to be notified but there was a sharper decline in those tested. For both infections, one-off partners had the lowest rates of accessing services and testing. For chlamydia, 81% were notified (42/52), 23% accessed services (12/52) and 21% tested (11/52). However, 91% of those tested were positive (10/11). The number of contactable one-off gonorrhoea contacts was small and few attended.
Conclusions: Measuring partner-centred PN outcomes was feasible. There were differences in partner engagement with PN between the different infections and partner types. If these findings are replicated in larger samples, it suggests that interventions to target one-off partners who have low rates of PN engagement yet high levels of positivity could play a key role in reducing infection at population level.
Background: The decision to use a particular test to diagnose patients presenting with symptoms of vaginitis and/or STI is based primarily on the prevailing standards of care in the clinic at which the patient evaluation takes place. As a result, laboratory testing of vaginal samples for these patients often involves either an STI or a vaginitis test, but rarely both options simultaneously, which complicates the diagnosis and management of concurrent infections.
Methods: Using de-identified remnant vaginal specimens from symptomatic patients previously tested for STI (Chlamydia trachomatis (CT), Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC) and Trichomonas vaginalis (TV)) with the Becton Dickinson (BD) CTGCTV2 assay for BD MAX System, positivity for bacterial vaginosis (BV) and Candida spp (associated with vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC)) were evaluated using the molecular-based BD MAX Vaginal Panel.
Findings: The rate of STI/BV co-infection was 79.4% (227/286) in this symptomatic population, while that of STI/VVC was 27.0% (77/285). Women diagnosed with any one of the three STIs tested had an OR 2.86 (95% CI, 1.99, 4.11; p<0.0001) for a concurrent BV infection and OR 0.96 (95% CI, 0.67, 1.37; p=0.8085) for infection with Candida species.
Conclusion: Our results suggest that women being tested for STI have a high prevalence of co-infection with BV and a lower, although appreciable, prevalence of co-infection with VVC. The detection of co-occurring vaginal infections can be facilitated by molecular testing using a single sample.
Objectives: We aimed to assess the awareness, willingness to use and use of doxycycline post-exposure prophylaxis (doxyPEP) among men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women (TGW) in Belgium. Additionally, we aimed to identify factors associated with doxyPEP use and concerns regarding antimicrobial resistance (AMR).
Methods: Cross-sectional online survey among MSM and TGW in Belgium in April 2024. Participants were recruited through sexual networking applications and social media of community-based organisations. Numerical variables were compared with Wilcoxon rank-sum test and categorical variables with χ2 or Fisher's exact tests. Factors associated with doxyPEP use were assessed using logistic regression. Willingness to use doxyPEP and concerns about side effects/AMR were assessed before and after presenting a brief paragraph on the potential effects of doxyPEP on AMR.
Results: 875 individuals initiated the survey. Almost all identified as men (860/875, 98.3%) with a median age of 40 years (IQR 32-48), 40.4% (n=352/875) had heard of doxyPEP and 9.4% (n=82/875) had used it, among whom the majority used it within the previous 6 months (70/81, 86.4%). In multivariable logistic regression, doxyPEP use was associated with reporting ≥1 sexually transmitted infection (STI) in the previous 12 months, engagement in chemsex, HIV status and pre-exposure prophylaxis use, and education level.About 80% of the participants initially reported being willing to use doxyPEP, and about 50% reported being concerned about side effects. After reading about the potential effects of doxyPEP on AMR, willingness to use decreased to 60% and concerns of side effects/AMR increased to around 70%.
Conclusions: Approximately 1 in 10 MSM in Belgium reported using doxyPEP. A recent history of STIs and STI risk factors were positively associated with doxyPEP use. Importantly, concerns about AMR and side effect influenced willingness to use doxyPEP. If doxyPEP is introduced, informing patients about doxyPEP benefits and risks is crucial to enable informed decision-making.
Objectives: Monkeypox (mpox) was declared as a global health emergency by the WHO, with most reported cases disproportionately involving gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM). This study explored the willingness of Singaporean GBMSM to receive mpox vaccines and engage in changes to sexual behaviour, and analysed the factors influencing both decisions.
Methods: An online cross-sectional study was disseminated through community groups and Grindr from September to October 2022 among GBMSM in Singapore, where we surveyed respondents' demographics, stigma associated with mpox, perceived risks of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and changes to sexual behaviours in response to mpox. Descriptive statistics and multivariable linear and logistics regression analyses, as well as thematic analysis of data, were also conducted.
Results: 237 GBMSM community members responded to the survey, with the majority being receptive to vaccine and 67.5% indicating changes to sexual behaviour in view of rising mpox infections. Predictors of vaccine receptivity among GBMSM included self-perceived mpox risk (adjusted OR (aOR)=0.44, 95% CI 0.07, 0.82) and self-perceived STI risk (aOR=0.39, 95% CI 0.03, 0.76). Predictors for changes to sexual behaviour included self-perceived mpox stigma (aOR=1.17, 95% CI 1.08, 1.27), self-perceived mpox risk (aOR=1.22, 95% CI 1.03,1.44), age (aOR=0.96, 95% CI 0.93, 1.00) and race (aOR=0.31, 95% CI 0.10, 0.93). In the thematic analysis, respondents raised concerns about vaccine effectiveness, side effects, cost and privacy.
Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the rise in mpox infections have prompted changes to GBMSM's sexual practices. In general, GBMSM are willing to receive the mpox vaccine but are concerned about the physical and social consequences of uptake. These concerns should be addressed when vaccines are released.
Objectives: People who use or would benefit from pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV infection are disproportionately affected by sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Integrating STI services when offering PrEP fosters synergies and efficiencies in response to HIV/STI and promotes people-centred care. Including guidance on STI interventions for people on PrEP may facilitate implementation and uptake. We conducted a global review of national PrEP guidance documents and analysed the inclusion of recommendations for the provision of STI services by country level of income.
Methods: We searched national PrEP guidance documents published by WHO Member States through the WHO, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) databases, the PrEPWatch repository and Google. Information on a range of STI-related interventions was extracted from documents available by October 2023.
Results: Of the 113 national PrEP guidance documents retrieved, STIs were mentioned in 77% (90/117). Viral hepatitis B testing and vaccination were recommended by most high-income countries (HICs) and low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Recommendation for syphilis testing was prominent in HICs (91%) and moderately noted in LMICs (68%). Gonorrhoea and chlamydia testing was recommended frequently in HICs (88%) and 42% in LMICs. However, the review noted that, to a much lesser extent, specific type of testing for these pathogens was mentioned. Recommendation for quarterly STI testing for syphilis, gonorrhoea and chlamydia was ubiquitous, while the need to offer STI partner services was rarely mentioned.
Conclusions: PrEP services offer an opportunity for improved and expanded STI services, increasing person-centred care and addressing STI epidemics alongside HIV. Our review highlights the strengths and gaps in incorporating critical STI interventions into national PrEP normative guidance. Addressing these gaps through a stepwise approach and increasing targeted testing and partner services can help improve quality of care and support an effective response to HIV and other STIs.