Search

Introduction: Efforts to improve pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake among gay men, transgender women, and Black cisgender women are evident across the United States, responding to epidemiologic data showing a disproportionate HIV burden in these communities. However, transgender men and other transmasculine people who have sex with men (TMSM)-those assigned female at birth who identify otherwise and have sex with cisgender men-are often excluded from these statistics. This community has unique vulnerabilities and prevention needs. National HIV prevention and planning has yet to include transgender men as a group with increased vulnerability to HIV seroconversion. This study follows a cohort of TMSM to characterize PrEP use longitudinally., Methods: Using data from a prospective US national cohort of TMSM not on PrEP, we analyzed annual PrEP uptake, discontinuation, and other HIV prevention measures over 24 months. We also used generalized estimating equations modeling to assess demographic, healthcare access, gender-affirming, and behavioral factors associated with PrEP uptake over time., Results: Our cohort of 196 TMSM was demographic and regionally diverse. 29% of our sample reported uptake of PrEP in 24 months, with about one-third of users discontinuing within 1 year. Health insurance, having had lower surgery, used post-exposure prophylaxis, or recently having a sexually transmitted infection were associated with increased odds of PrEP use., Conclusion: We found low uptake of PrEP and high discontinuation rates in a US national sample of TMSM over 24 months, despite significant need for HIV prevention. It is vital to increase efforts and investments to support this neglected community., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Our study assessed the association between methamphetamine (i.e., crystal meth, CM) use and awareness and interest in event-driven (ED) PrEP among HIV-negative and those with unknown serostatus cisgender males and transgender people. We performed log-binomial regression analysis to predict awareness (i.e., having heard of ED PrEP) and being interested in ED PrEP. We found that participants who recently used CM were less likely to know of ED PrEP (aPR = 0.83, 95% CI [0.69, 0.99]) but more interested in ED PrEP (aPR = 1.12, 95% CI [1.01, 1.30]), after accounting for demographic and HIV-related behaviors. Opportunities to expand PrEP uptake and improve adherence among individuals who report CM use are essential to impact the HIV epidemic significantly. Continued research on the needs and best practices to work with this community is needed to ensure a successful rollout and implementation of ED PrEP.

Methamphetamine use is on the rise among sexual and gender minority people who have sex with men (SGMSM), escalating their HIV risk. Despite pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) being an effective biomedical HIV prevention tool, its uptake in relation to methamphetamine use patterns in SGMSM has not been studied. In a U.S. cohort study from 2017 to 2022, 6,253 HIV-negative SGMSM indicated for but not using PrEP were followed for four years. Methamphetamine use was categorized (i.e., newly initiated, persistently used, never used, used but quit), and PrEP uptake assessed using generalized estimating equation (GEE), adjusted for attrition. Participants had a median age of 29, with 51.9% White, 11.1% Black, 24.5% Latinx, and 12.5% other races/ethnicities. Over the four years, PrEP use increased from 16.3 to 27.2%. GEE models identified risk factors including housing instability and food insecurity. In contrast, older age, health insurance, clinical indications, and prior PrEP use increased uptake. Notably, Latinx participants were more likely to use PrEP than Whites. Regarding methamphetamine use, those who newly initiated it were more likely to use PrEP compared to non-users. However, those who quit methamphetamine and those who persistently used it had PrEP usage rates comparable to those of non-users. Though PrEP uptake increased, it remained low in SGMSM. Methamphetamine use was associated with PrEP uptake. Healthcare providers should assess methamphetamine use for harm reduction. Prioritizing younger, uninsured SGMSM and addressing basic needs can enhance PrEP uptake and reduce HIV vulnerabilities., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) use continues lag estimated need among gay and bisexual men in the United States. Studies report that challenges paying for PrEP may undermine continued use. Our study aimed to measure these challenges over time., Methods: Data were taken from a US national cohort study of cisgender gay and bisexual men and transgender individuals aged 16-49 years. We analyzed data from PrEP-using participants between 2019 and 2021 and observed cost-related and insurance-related challenges participants experienced while on PrEP across time points. We report McNemar and Cochrane Q test statistics to compare differences between groups by year(s)., Results: In 2019, 16.5% (n = 828/5013) of participants were on PrEP; by 2020, 21% (n = 995/4727) were on PrEP, and by 2021, 24.5% (n = 1133/4617) were on PrEP. The proportion of those experiencing challenges paying for PrEP care decreased significantly across time points for clinical appointments, laboratory work, and prescriptions. Those experiencing insurance and copay approval issues did not change significantly. Although not statistically significant, the only proportion that increased over time was those reporting PrEP-related insurance approval issues. In a post hoc analysis, we found that those reporting PrEP use in the past year who were not currently on PrEP were significantly more likely to report experiencing most PrEP challenges, when compared with current PrEP users., Discussion: We found significant reductions in insurance and cost-related challenges between 2019 and 2021. However, those who discontinued PrEP within the past year reported greater challenges paying for PrEP, suggesting that cost and insurance issues may undermine PrEP persistence., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

HIV-outcome inequities remain prevalent in the U.S. Medical providers (MPs) are gatekeepers of PrEP, and understanding the dynamics of PrEP assessments is of major interest for public health. We analyzed data from Together 5000, an internet-based U.S. national cohort of sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals aged 16-49 years and at risk for HIV. Among those eligible for PrEP uptake (n = 6264), we modeled predictors of discussing PrEP with an MP. A third (31%) of participants had spoken to a MP about PrEP. Among those who spoke to a MP, 45% suggested they would initiate PrEP; this outcome was more common among participants older than 24. With a persistent stagnant uptake nationwide, new opportunities to influence PrEP uptake must be explored. An attractive less targeted space is the medical office, specifically ways to support an initial and continued discussion about PrEP between MPs and their patients.

Objective: To explore the association of clinical guideline-related variables, demographics and Medicaid expansion on pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake in one of the largest US sample of men who have sex with men(MSM) and transgender and gender non-binary (TGNB) people ever analysed., Methods: We cross-sectionally analysed predictors of current PrEP use using demographic and HIV risk-related variables (level-1), as well as state-level variables (level-2) (ie, Medicaid expansion status). We further explored the role state of residence plays in PrEP uptake disparities across the USA., Results: We found that the odds of PrEP use were significantly greater in older age, white, cisgender men. Moreover, individuals who reported recent post-exposure prophylaxis use, a recent sexually transmitted infection diagnosis and recent drug use were significantly more likely to report PrEP use. Finally, we found that the median odds of PrEP use between similar individuals from different states were 1.40 for the ones living in the Medicaid expansion states, compared with those not living in Medicaid expansion states. State of residence did not play a significant role in explaining PrEP disparities overall., Conclusion: Our analysis showed that PrEP use is less common in communities standing to benefit the most from it-young MSM and TGNB of colour. However, individuals meeting federal guidelines for PrEP were significantly more likely to use PrEP. Though we found a positive association between living in Medicaid expansion states and PrEP use; that variable, as well as one's state of residency, were not suitable to explain variations in PrEP use in the US., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

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.

Safety differences between tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (TAF) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC)-formulated pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) appear to have little clinical significance for most PrEP users. Furthermore, generic TDF-formulated PrEP is projected to decrease the price of PrEP. Thus, efforts to shift PrEP users to TAF-formulated PrEP should be considered in light of their potential to undermine efforts to scale-up PrEP nationally. Data are taken from Together 5,000, a US national cohort study predominantly composed of cisgender gay and bisexual men. In 2019-2020, 5034 participants completed their 24-month assessment, which measured whether participants were switching from TDF (Truvada) to TAF (Descovy) for PrEP, and why. Of those reporting PrEP-use ( n  = 1009), 277 reported using Descovy for PrEP, and 223 provided a reason for switching to Descovy. A content analysis was used to code participant's reasons for switching. Over half (56%) of participants reported that their doctor recommended switching to Descovy. Without mentioning a provider recommendation, 32% of participants reported that perceived improved safety of Descovy, compared with Truvada, motivated their decision to change their prescription. Other factors cited included the smaller size of the pill and "newness" of Descovy. Further, several participants mentioned negative advertising about Truvada as rationale for switching. Although scientific consensus supports the safety of both TDF/FTC and TAF, our results suggest that current messaging through physicians and other sources have emphasized superior safety of TAF-implying that TDF/FTC may not be safe in the long term. Efforts to shift users onto TAF may undermine public perception of TDF-formulated PrEP.

While the "Undetectable = Untransmittable" (U=U) message is widely endorsed, little is known about its breadth and reach. Our study describes socio-demographic characteristics and sexual behaviors associated with having heard of and trusting in U =U in a U.S. national sample of HIV-negative participants. Data were derived from the Together 5,000 cohort study, an internet-based U.S. national cohort of cis men, trans men and trans women who have sex with men. Approximately 6 months after enrollment, participants completed an optional survey included in the present cross-sectional analysis (n = 3286). Measures included socio-demographic and healthcare-related characteristics; questions pertaining to knowledge of and trust in U=U (dependable variable). We used descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic models to identify characteristics associated with these variables and explored patterns in willingness to engage in condomless anal sex (CAS) with regard to trust in U=U. In total, 85.5% of participants reported having heard of U=U. Among those aware of U=U, 42.3% indicated they trusted it, 19.8% did not, and 38.0% were unsure about it. Latinx, Asian, lower income, and Southern participants were less likely to have heard of U=U. Having had a recent clinical discussion about PrEP or being a former-PrEP user were associated with trust in U=U. Willingness to engage in CAS was positively associated with trust in U=U, and varied based on the partner's serostatus, PrEP use and viral load. Although we found high rates of awareness and low levels of distrust, our study indicated that key communities remain unaware and/or skeptical of U=U.