Search

The sexual health of female-to-male (FTM) transgender men remains understudied. De-identified electronic medical records of 23 FTMs (mean age = 32, 48% racial/ethnic minority) who screened for sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) between July and December 2007 at a Boston, Massachusetts area health center were analyzed. Almost half (48%) were on testosterone and 39% had undergone chest surgery; none had undergone genital reconstruction. The majority (57%) were bisexual, and 30% reported sex with nontransgender males only in the prior three months. One individual was HIV-infected (4.3%) and two (8.7%) had a history of STDs (all laboratory-confirmed). Overall, 26% engaged in sexual risk behavior in the prior three months (i.e., unprotected sex with a nontransgender male, condom breakage, or anonymous sex). The majority (61%) had a DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition) diagnosis (52% depression, 52% anxiety, and 26% adjustment disorder), and regular alcohol use was common (65%). Alcohol use, psychosocial distress histories, and sex with males only (versus with males and females) were associated with sexual risk in the past three months. Transgender men have concomitant psychosocial health vulnerabilities which may contribute to sexual risk behaviors. Future research is needed to understand the myriad social, behavioral, and biological factors that contribute to HIV and STD vulnerability for FTMs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2010, the centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (CAPRISA)004 and iPrEx trials (microbicide gel containing tenofovir and oral pill containing tenofovir–emtricitabine, respectively) demonstrated that antiretroviral preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) reduced the risk of HIV acquisition among high-risk individuals. To determine the facilitators and barriers to PrEP provision by health-care providers, we conducted an online, quantitative survey of Massachusetts-area physicians following the publication of the CAPRISA and iPrEx results. We assessed awareness and comprehension of efficacy data, prescribing experience, and anticipated provision of oral and topical PrEP among physicians, as well as demographic and behavioral factors associated with PrEP awareness and prescribing intentions. The majority of HIV specialists and generalist physicians were aware of data from these PrEP trials and able to correctly interpret the results, however, correct interpretation of findings tended to vary according to specialty (i.e., HIV specialists had greater awareness than generalists). In addition, provider concerns regarding PrEP efficacy and safety, as well its ability to divert funds from other HIV prevention resources, were associated with decreased intentions to prescribe both oral and topical PrEP. Findings suggest that a substantial proportion of physicians who may have contact with at-risk individuals may benefit from interventions that provide accurate data on the risks and benefits of PrEP in order to facilitate effective PrEP discussions with their patients. Future studies to develop and test interventions aimed at health-care providers should be prioritized to optimize implementation of PrEP in clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2010, the iPrEx trial demonstrated that oral antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) reduced the risk of HIV acquisition among high-risk men who have sex with men (MSM). The impact of iPrEx on PrEP knowledge and actual use among at-risk MSM is unknown. Online surveys were conducted to assess PrEP awareness, interest and experience among at-risk MSM before and after iPrEx, and to determine demographic and behavioral factors associated with these measures. Methods and Findings: Cross-sectional, national, internet-based surveys were administered to U.S. based members of the most popular American MSM social networking site 2 months before (n = 398) and 1 month after (n = 4 558) publication of iPrEx results. Comparisons were made between these samples with regards to PrEP knowledge, interest, and experience. Data were collected on demographics, sexual risk, and experience with post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with PrEP awareness, interest, and experience post-iPrEx. Most participants were white, educated, and indicated high-risk sexual behaviors. Awareness of PrEP was limited pre- and post-iPrEx (13% vs. 19%), whereas interest levels after being provided with a description of PrEP remained high (76% vs. 79%). PrEP use remained uncommon (0.7% vs. 0.9%). PrEP use was associated with PEP awareness (OR 7.46; CI 1.52–36.6) and PEP experience (OR 34.2; CI 13.3–88.4). PrEP interest was associated with older age (OR 1.01; CI 1.00–1.02), unprotected anal intercourse with ≥1 male partner in the prior 3 months (OR 1.40; CI 1.10–1.77), and perceiving oneself at increased risk for HIV acquisition (OR 1.20; CI 1.13–1.27). Conclusions: Among MSM engaged in online networking, awareness of PrEP was limited 1 month after the iPrEx data were released. Utilization was low, although some MSM who reported high-risk behaviors were interested in using PrEP. Studies are needed to understand barriers to PrEP utilization by at-risk MSM.