Suchergebnisse

AbstractIntroductionDelays between receiving a PrEP prescription and taking a first dose increase the risk of HIV infection. This is especially relevant in populations with high HIV incidence, such as young black men who have sex with men (YBMSM) in the United States. Additionally, YBMSM have relatively low levels of health insurance. We investigated whether lack of health insurance and reliance on PrEP funding through the manufacturer assistance programme (MAP) leads to delays in initiation of PrEP.MethodsHIV‐negative YBMSM were offered PrEP as part of a prospective cohort. Enrolment began in June 2015 with follow‐up through February 2019. Interested participants attended a PrEP clinician visit and received a prescription. Those with health insurance received a copay assistance card; those without insurance accessed PrEP using the MAP. The primary outcome was the days between prescription and initiation. The effect of insurance status on this delay was modelled using a Cox proportional hazards model.Results and DiscussionThe median delay between receipt of a PrEP prescription and taking a first dose was 12 days (IQR 3 to 32). Compared to uninsured participants, the adjusted hazard ratio for PrEP initiation for those with insurance was 2.72 (95% CI 1.82 to 4.06). The adjusted median time to initiation for insured participants was 5 days versus 21 days for those without insurance (p < 0.0001). Older age and STI diagnosis were also associated with faster PrEP initiation. Despite equivalent access to PrEP provided by the study, YBMSM without insurance had longer delays in initiation after receipt of a prescription. Overall, the observed delay in PrEP initiation increases the chances of HIV infection and the possibility of PrEP initiation after undetected seroconversion.ConclusionsThe extended time period between PrEP prescription and taking a first dose increases the risk of HIV transmission. Younger YBMSM and those without health insurance had longer delays in PrEP initiation. Immediate PrEP initiation programmes could decrease the likelihood of this occurrence and mitigate the disparity in initiation between those with and without health insurance. Clinical Trial Number: NCT02503618.

AbstractIntroductionOral pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and emtricitabine (FTC) is highly effective in preventing HIV infection among men who have sex with men (MSM). The effects of consistent personal lubricant use in the rectum on tissue PrEP drug concentrations and the rectal microbiota are unknown. We investigated rectal PrEP drug concentrations and the microbiota in MSM before and after repeated rectal application of a hyperosmolar lubricant.MethodsWe randomized 60 HIV‐negative MSM to apply 4 mL of hyperosmolar rectal lubricant daily (n = 20), take daily oral TDF/FTC (n = 19), or both (n = 21) for seven days. Blood, rectal biopsies and rectal secretions were collected via rigid sigmoidoscopy before and on day 8 after product use. Tenofovir (TFV) and FTC as well as their intracellular metabolites tenofovir‐diphosphate (TFV‐DP), FTC‐triphosphate (FTC‐TP) were measured by HPLC‐mass spectrometry. Rectal mucosal microbiota was sequenced with 16S rRNA sequencing using Illumina MiSeq.ResultsSeven days of lubricant application was not associated with differences in PrEP drug concentrations in rectal tissue or secretions. Lubricant use was associated with a decrease in the relative abundance of the Bacteroides genus (p = 0.01) and a non‐significant increase in the Prevotella genus (p = 0.09) in the rectum. PrEP drug concentrations in rectal tissue and secretions were not associated with microbiota composition or diversity either before or after lubricant use.ConclusionsRepeated rectal application of a hyperosmolar lubricant does not affect mucosal PrEP drug concentrations but is associated with changes in the rectal microbiome.

AbstractIntroductionWe previously showed that the rectal mucosal immune environment among men who have sex with men (MSM) engaging in condomless receptive anal intercourse (CRAI) is immunologically distinct from that of men who do not engage in anal intercourse (AI). Here, we further examined these differences with quantitative immunohistochemistry to better understand the geographic distribution of immune markers of interest.MethodsWe enrolled a cohort of MSM engaging in CRAI (n = 41) and men who do not engage in AI (n = 21) between October 2013 and April 2015. Participants were healthy, HIV‐negative men aged 18–45 from the metro Atlanta area. We performed rectal mucosal sampling via rigid sigmoidoscopy during two study visits separated by a median of nine weeks and timed with sexual activity for MSM engaging in CRAI. We used standardized, automated immunohistochemistry and quantitative image analysis to investigate the rectal mucosal distribution of neutrophils (MPO), IL‐17‐producing cells (IL‐17) and Tregs (FOXP3) in the lamina propria, and cellular proliferation (Ki67) and adherens junction protein (E‐cadherin) in the epithelium. We examined associations between biomarker expression and the rectal mucosal microbiota composition by 16s rRNA sequencing.ResultsRelative to the colonic crypt base, IL‐17, FOXP3, and MPO expression increased towards the rectal lumen, while Ki67 decreased and E‐cadherin was more uniformly distributed. Throughout the rectal mucosa distribution examined, MSM engaging in CRAI had higher mean lamina propria MPO expression (p = 0.04) and epithelial Ki67 (p = 0.04) compared to controls. There were no significant differences in IL‐17, FOXP3 or E‐cadherin expression. We found no significant associations of the five biomarkers with the global rectal microbiota composition or the individual taxa examined.ConclusionsUnderstanding the mucosal distribution of inflammatory mediators can enhance our knowledge of the earliest events in HIV transmission. Neutrophil enrichment and crypt epithelial cell proliferation likely represent sub‐clinical inflammation in response to CRAI in the rectal mucosa of MSM, which could increase the risk for HIV acquisition. However, the contributory role of the microbiota in mucosal inflammation among MSM remains unclear. HIV prevention may be enhanced by interventions that reduce inflammation or capitalize on the presence of specific inflammatory mechanisms during HIV exposure.

AbstractIntroductionHPTN 083 demonstrated the superiority of long‐acting cabotegravir (CAB‐LA) versus daily oral emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF/FTC) as pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men (MSM/TGW). HPTN 083 provided the first opportunity to understand experiences with injectable PrEP in a clinical trial.MethodsParticipants from two US sites (Chicago, IL and Atlanta, GA) and one international site (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) were purposively sampled for individual qualitative interviews (N = 40), between November 2019 and March 2020, to explore trial experiences, barriers to adherence and other factors that may have impacted study implementation or outcomes. The blinded phase ended early due to efficacy; this analysis includes interviews conducted prior to unblinding with three groups defined by adherence (i.e. injection visit attendance): adherent (n = 27), non‐adherent (n = 12) and early discontinuers (n = 1). Data were organized using NVivo software and analysed using content analysis.ResultsParticipants (mean age: 27) were primarily cisgender MSM (90%) and Black/African American (60%). Reasons for trial enrolment and PrEP use included a preference for using HIV prevention medication versus treatment in the event of HIV acquisition; the ability to enhance health via study‐related education and services; access to a novel, convenient HIV prevention product at no cost; and contributing to MSM/TGW communities through research. Participants contrasted positive experiences with study staff with their routine clinical care, and emphasized increased scheduling flexibility, thorough communication, non‐judgemental counselling and open, affirming environments (e.g. compassion, less stigma) as adherence facilitators. Injection experiences were positive overall; some described early injection‐related anxiety, which abated with time and when given some measure of control (e.g. pre‐injection countdown), and minimal injection site discomfort. Some concerns and misperceptions about injectable PrEP were reported. Barriers to adherence, across all adherence categories, included structural factors (e.g. financial constraints, travel) and competing demands (e.g. work schedules).ConclusionsRespondents viewed injectable PrEP trial participation as a positive experience and a means of enhancing wellbeing. Study site flexibility and affirming clinic environments, inclusive of non‐judgemental counselling, were key facilitators of adherence. To support injection persistence, interventions that address structural barriers and promote flexible means of injection delivery may be most effective.