Search

IntroductionKey populations at elevated risk to contract or transmit HIV may also be at higher risk of COVID-19 complications and adverse outcomes associated with public health prevention measures. However, the conditions faced by specific populations vary according to social, structural and environmental factors, including stigma and discrimination, criminalization, social and economic safety nets and the local epidemiology of HIV and COVID-19, which determine risk of exposure and vulnerability to adverse health outcomes, as well as the ability to comply with measures such as physical distancing. This commentary identifies common vulnerabilities and cross-cutting themes in terms of the impacts of COVID-19 on key populations before addressing issues and concerns specific to particular populations.DiscussionCross-cutting themes include direct impacts such as disrupted access to essential medicines, commodities and services such as anti-retroviral treatment, HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis, opioid agonist treatment, viral load monitoring, HIV and sexually transmitted infections testing, condoms and syringes. Indirect impacts include significant collateral damage arising from prevention measures which restrict human rights, increase or impose criminal penalties, and expand police powers to target vulnerable and criminalized populations. Significant heterogeneity in the COVID-19 pandemic, the underlying HIV epidemic and the ability of key populations to protect themselves means that people who inject drugs and sex workers face particular challenges, including indirect impacts as a result of police targeting, loss of income and sometimes both. Geographical variations mean that transgender people and men who have sex with men in regions like Africa and the middle east remain criminalized, as well as stigmatized and discriminated against, increasing their vulnerability to adverse outcomes in relation to COVID-19.ConclusionsDisruptions to both licit and illicit supply chains, loss of income and livelihoods and changes in behaviour as a result of lockdowns and physical distancing have the potential to exacerbate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on key populations. While these impacts will vary significantly, human-rights approaches to COVID-19 emergency laws and public health prevention measures that are population-specific and sensitive, will be key to reducing adverse health outcomes and ensuring that no one is left behind.

Introduction: There are few data about the range of strategies used to prevent sexual HIV transmission within gay male serodiscordant couples. We examined HIV prevention strategies used by such couples and compared differences between countries. Methods: Opposites Attract was a cohort study of male serodiscordant couples in Australia, Brazil and Thailand, from May 2014 (Australia) or May 2016 (Brazil/Thailand) to December 2016. At visits, HIV-positive partners had viral load (VL) tested; HIV-negative partners reported sexual behaviour and perceptions of their HIV-positive partner's VL results. Within-couple acts of condomless anal intercourse (CLAI) were categorized by strategy: condom-protected, biomedically protected (undetectable VL and/or pre-exposure prophylaxis [PrEP]), or not protected by either (HIV-negative partners engaging in insertive CLAI, receptive CLAI with withdrawal, or receptive CLAI with ejaculation). Results: A total of 343 couples were included in this analysis (153 in Australia, 93 in Brazil and 97 in Thailand). Three-quarters of HIV-positive partners were consistently virally suppressed ( Keywords: serodiscordant couples; homosexual; gay men; men who have sex with men; HIV prevention; risk reduction strategies; sexual behaviour, 1 INTRODUCTION HIV-negative partners in gay male serodiscordant couples are considered high risk for HIV infection [1], and it is often recommended that serodiscordant couples be a key focus of [...]

Introduction: We determined the contribution of undiagnosed HIV to new infections among gay and bisexual men (GBM) over a 12-year period in Australia where there has been increasing focus on improving testing and HIV treatment coverage. Methods: We generated annual estimates for each step of the HIV cascade and the number of new HIV infections for GBM in Australia over 2004 to 2015 using relevant national data. Using Bayesian melding we then fitted a quantitative model to the cascade and incidence estimates to infer relative transmission coefficients associated with being undiagnosed, diagnosed and not on ART, on ART with unsuppressed virus, or on ART with suppressed virus. Results: Between 2004 and 2015, we estimated the percentage of GBM with HIV in Australia who were unaware of their status to have decreased from 14.5% to 7.5%. During the same period, there was a substantial increase in the number and proportion of GBM living with HIV on treatment and with suppressed virus, with the number of virally suppressed GBM increasing from around 3900 (30.2% of all GBM living with HIV) in 2004 to around 14,000 (73.7% of all GBM living with HIV) in 2015. Despite the increase in viral suppression, the annual number of new infections rose from around 660 to around 760 over this period. Our results have a wide range due to the uncertainty in the cascade estimates and transmission coefficients. Nevertheless, undiagnosed GBM increasingly appear to contribute to new infections. The proportion of new infections attributable to undiagnosed GBM almost doubled from 33% in 2004 to 59% in 2015. Only a small proportion ( Discussion: Our study suggests that an increase in HIV treatment coverage in Australia has reduced the overall risk of HIV transmission from people living with HIV. However, the proportion of infections and the rate of transmission from undiagnosed GBM has increased substantially. These findings highlight the importance of HIV testing and intensified prevention for Australian GBM at high risk of HIV. Keywords: Australia; gay and bisexual men; mathematical model; transmission dynamics; undiagnosed HIV; HIV cascade, 1 | INTRODUCTION People with undiagnosed HIV contribute disproportionately to HIV transmission because the early stages of infection are the most infectious, and without treatment an individual remains infectious [1-7]. [...]

Introduction: Studies in heterosexual HIV serodiscordant couples have provided critical evidence on the role of HIV treatments in reducing HIV transmission risk. However, there are limited data regarding the effect of treatment on HIV transmission in homosexual male couples. We examined features of male homosexual HIV serodiscordant relationships that may impact upon the design of HIV treatment and transmission studies. Methods: Data were from a prospective cohort study of HIV-negative homosexual men in Sydney, Australia. Men were followed up with six-monthly interviews and annual testing for HIV. Characteristics of men in HIV serodiscordant and seroconcordant relationships at baseline were compared, and a longitudinal analysis performed of rate of relationship break-up and of HIV incidence. Results: At baseline, 5.5% of participants (n = 79) had an HIV-positive partner. Most (80.8%) of these relationships were nonmonogamous, and 36.7% of men reported recent unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with casual partners. The rate of relationship break-up was 29.5 per 100 person-years. Half of men in serodiscordant relationships (49.4%) reported recent UAI with their regular partners. HIV incidence was 2.2 per 100 person-years. It was substantially higher in relationships of less than one year's duration (6.1 per 100 person-years) and in men who reported unprotected receptive anal intercourse with ejaculation with their regular partners (15.5 per 100 person-years). Conclusions: Levels of HIV transmission risk and incidence were high, particularly in early relationships. Rates of relationship break-up were high. These data suggest that studies of HIV treatments and transmission in homosexual serodiscordant couples should focus on early relationships so as not to underestimate risk, and sample sizes must allow for high rates of relationship break-up. Keywords: HIV treatment as prevention; men who have sex with men; homosexual men; serodiscordant couples; HIV viral load; HIV transmission., Introduction Longitudinal studies in heterosexual HIV serodiscordant couples have been critical in delineating the role of the treatment of HIV-positive partners with antiretroviral therapy (ART) in reducing the risk of [...]