Global incidence of chlamydia infection and HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis.

Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Uptake, Adherence, and Persistence: A Narrative Review of Interventions in the U.S.

Toward Greater Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Equity: Increasing Provision and Uptake for Black and Hispanic/Latino Individuals in the U.S.

Sexually transmitted outbreaks and genomic surveillance

Limited research exists on HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) interest among female university students in high-HIV-prevalence African settings. This study sought to establish the relationship between epidemiological and perceived HIV risk and PrEP intention among young women in higher education in Zambia. We recruited female students at an urban university to complete an online survey on intention to use PrEP in the next year (primary outcome); PrEP knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors; demographics; epidemiological HIV risk; and risk perception. Descriptive statistics, regression, and mediation analyses were used. Of the 454 sexually active participants, 118 (26%) reported PrEP intention. Actual PrEP use was rare (<5%). The odds of PrEP intention increased for those with perceived high HIV risk [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.08; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.71-5.55] and with each year at university (aOR = 1.47; 95% CI: 1.21-1.80) but decreased with higher PrEP stigma (aOR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.86-0.96) and more negative PrEP perceptions (aOR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.85-0.97). More epidemiological risk factors were originally associated with PrEP intention (aOR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.01-1.53 for each risk factor), though this relationship weakened after adjustment for perceived HIV risk, which mediated 69% of the relationship between epidemiological HIV risk and PrEP intention. Only 23% of high-risk participants recognized their high epidemiological HIV risk (3+ risk factors). Along with PrEP education and stigma reduction, there is a need for approaches that help female university students in Zambia accurately identify their HIV risk to make informed decisions about PrEP use.

Objective:Use of preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV raises concerns about sexually transmitted infection (STI) incidence because of decreased condom use among MSM. This study examines whether PrEP is associated with STIs in the 12 months following PrEP prescription relative to the 12 months prior to PrEP and if STI rates are higher among PrEP users relative to individuals receiving postexposure prophylaxis (PEP).Design:Retrospective cohort study including PrEP users with more than 12 months of follow-up before PrEP prescription and individuals receiving PEP from 2010 to 2015 at Clinique l’Actuel (Montréal, Canada).Methods:Incidence of chlamydia, gonorrhoea, syphilis and hepatitis C virus over 12 months was compared before and after PrEP; and for PrEP versus PEP users using Poisson models to generate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and adjusted IRRs (aIRRs) controlling for frequency of STI-screening visits. Models comparing PrEP and PEP users were further adjusted for age and education.Results:One hundred and nine PrEP and 86 PEP users were included. Increased rates of STIs were observed in the 12 months after PrEP relative to the 12 months prior (IRR: 1.72, CI: 1.22–2.41; aIRR: 1.39, CI 0.98–1.96). PrEP users were also at higher STI risk relative to PEP users (IRR: 2.18, CI: 1.46–3.24; aIRR: 1.76, CI: 1.14–2.71).Conclusion:Increased rates of STIs among individuals after initiation of PrEP may suggest greater risk behaviours during the first year on PrEP. Further studies are needed to measure long-term trends in STI acquisition following PrEP initiation.

Syphilis testing, incidence, and reinfection among gay and bisexual men in Australia over a decade spanning HIV PrEP implementation: an analysis of surveillance data from 2012 to 2022

BackgroundThe advent of antiretroviral therapy (ART) has transformed the management of living with HIV into a chronic condition, however, barriers to access persist. Utilization management techniques (UMTs) used by payers to optimize care and resource efficiency often pose challenges for people living with HIV (PLWH) and individuals with increased likelihood of HIV exposure. This study examined the burden of ART-specific UMTs across access pathways in the US, and impact on PLWH, individuals vulnerable to HIV acquisition, and the healthcare system.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted in MEDLINE®, Embase®, JSTOR, PubMed, and government/non-government HIV management websites focusing on ART-specific UMTs in treatment and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) of HIV in the US. The search covered publications from the last 10 years and conference abstracts from the last 4 years. Studies that met predefined inclusion criteria, based on the PICOTS framework, were included.ResultsOf 1,863 records, 21 met the study criteria, mostly from the private setting (76%). Prior authorization (PA) was the most common UMT identified (71%), followed by step therapy (5%) and quantity limits (5%) for both HIV treatment and PrEP. For oral HIV PrEP, PAs ranged from 2.3% (Northeast) to 37.3% (South). PA-led rejection rates of up to 21% for HIV PrEP regimens were identified, with formulary restrictions contributing to worse clinical outcomes for HIV treatment and PrEP. While there was a paucity of economic burden data for individuals, formulary restrictions imposed substantial costs to the healthcare system ($2.19 billion higher vs. the open formulary). Provider-based studies reported UMTs substantially impact HIV care, with one study reporting that 76% of providers indicate interference with optimal care, 72% citing UMTs and formularies impede prescribing optimal HIV treatment/PrEP.ConclusionUMT may pose substantial barriers to timely HIV care and prevention. While intended to control costs, they often result in treatment delays, worsening outcomes, and higher expenses. Despite national efforts to eliminate UMTs for HIV treatment and PrEP, access to ART remains unequal. Policy reforms for UMTs may help facilitate equitable access to HIV care, improve health outcomes, and reduce the HIV burden.DisclosuresGirish Prajapati, M.B.B.S., MPH , Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee|Merck & Co., Inc.: Stocks/Bonds (Private Company) Sean P. Fleming, PhD, MSW, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA: Employee|Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA: Stocks/Bonds (Public Company) David E. Koren, PharmD, BCPS, AAHIVP, Gilead Sciences: Advisor/Consultant|Merck Sharp and Dohme: Advisor/Consultant|ViiV Healthcare: Advisor/Consultant Orbit R. Clanton, AOS, Global Community HIV Advocate, Merck & Co., Inc: Advisor/Consultant Harshil Patel, BSc, Merck & Co., Inc: Advisor/Consultant Lucia Perez-Kempner, BPharm, MSc, MBS, Merck & Co., Inc: Advisor/Consultant Astha Jain, M.Pharmacy, Merck & Co., Inc: Advisor/Consultant Sugandh Sharma, M.Sc., Merck & Co., Inc: Advisor/Consultant

Background Youth with a history of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are at increased risk of HIV acquisition and should be counseled on HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP). PrEP counseling has been associated with high acceptability rates in primary care, but most pediatric providers do not discuss PrEP during clinic visits. We conducted a quality improvement project at primary care clinics affiliated with a tertiary not-for-profit children’s hospital serving the city of Milwaukee. The objective of this project is to increase rates of counseling on HIV testing and PrEP during primary care visits around an STI diagnosis, as part of a larger institutional initiative to increase PrEP utilization in at-risk youth. Methods Rates of HIV testing and PrEP counseling were monitored monthly during baseline (July 2022-June 2023) and post-intervention periods (July 2023-June 2024) using Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles tracked via a statistical process control chart. We included well child and sexual health-related office visits in youth aged 12 and older that occurred within 3 months of a bacterial STI diagnosis (gonorrhea, chlamydia, or syphilis). Interventions consisted of a clinician educational session, a prompt in the electronic health record (EHR) for missing HIV tests and a communication to the primary care provider containing internal PrEP resources following a patient’s STI diagnosis. Results From July 2022 to December 2023, we identified 255 primary care visits around an STI diagnosis (90.59% chlamydia, 25.49% gonorrhea, 0.39% syphilis and 16.47% co-infections). Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Interim analysis showed counseling rates on HIV testing increased from 50% to 63% (Figure 1) and PrEP counseling from 5% to 15% (Figure 2) through December 2023. Data will continue to be measured through June 2024. Conclusion For the first 6 months of our project, clinician education combined with an EHR prompt and provider communications containing PrEP resources have resulted in a modest increase in counseling rates on HIV testing and PrEP for at-risk youth during primary care visits. These initial interventions demonstrate a promising start towards enhancing HIV prevention discussions in pediatric primary care. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Daily oral HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) delivery requires quarterly clinic visits for HIV testing and drug refilling that are costly to health systems and clients. To evaluate whether 6-month PrEP dispensing supported with interim HIV self-testing (HIVST) results in noninferior PrEP continuation outcomes at 12 months compared with standard quarterly clinic visits. This randomized noninferiority trial was conducted from May 2018 to May 2021 with 12 months of follow-up among PrEP clients aged 18 years or older who were returning for their first refill at a research clinic in Kiambu County, Kenya. Participants were randomized 2:1 to (1) 6-month PrEP dispensing with semiannual clinic visits and interim HIVST at 3 months or (2) standard-of-care (SOC) PrEP delivery with 3-month dispensing, quarterly clinic visits, and clinic-based HIV testing. Prespecified 12-month outcomes included recent HIV testing (any in past 6 months), PrEP refilling, and PrEP adherence (detectable tenofovir-diphosphate concentrations in dried blood spots). Binomial regression models were used to estimate risk differences (RDs), and a 1-sided 95% CI lower bound (LB) of -10% or greater was interpreted as noninferior. A total of 495 participants were enrolled, with 329 enrolled in the intervention group and 166 enrolled in the SOC group; 330 (66.7%) were women, 295 (59.6%) were in serodifferent relationships, and the median (IQR) age was 33 (27-40) years. At 12 months, 241 individuals in the intervention group (73.3%) and 120 in the SOC group (72.3%) returned to clinic. In the intervention group, recent HIV testing was noninferior (230 individuals [69.9%]) compared with the SOC group (116 [69.9%]; RD, -0.33%, 95% CI LB, -7.44%). PrEP refilling in the intervention group (196 [59.6%]) was inconclusive compared with the SOC group (104 [62.7%]; RD, -3.25%; 95% CI LB, -10.84%), and PrEP adherence was noninferior in the intervention group (151 [45.9%]) compared with the SOC group (70 [42.2%]; RD, 4.96%; 95% CI LB, -2.46%). No HIV seroconversions were observed over the follow-up period. In this analysis of secondary trial end points at 1 year, semiannual PrEP dispensing with interim HIVST resulted in noninferior recent HIV testing and PrEP adherence compared with SOC quarterly PrEP dispensing. This novel model has the potential to optimize PrEP delivery. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03593629.

HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (HIV-PrEP) is an effective method for preventing HIV transmission, and it is recommended in several international guidelines. Perceptions and knowledge about HIV-PrEP prescription among healthcare providers have not been investigated in Thailand where HIV-PrEP is a novel healthcare topic. The objective of study was to determine healthcare providers’ attitudes towards, knowledge about, and confidence to prescribe HIV-PrEP in Thailand.A questionnaire was administered to Thai healthcare providers during May 1, 2017 to September 5, 2018.Of the 500 questionnaires that were distributed, 460 were returned (92%). Respondents included 336 physicians (48 infectious disease [ID] physicians, 288 non-ID physicians) and 124 non-physicians (70 nurses, 35 pharmacists, and 19 others). Eighty one percent of respondents had a positive attitude towards HIV-PrEP. Multivariate analysis revealed being a non-ID physician, having prior knowledge about HIV-PrEP, believing that HIV-PrEP can reduce the number of new patients, and believing that HIV-PrEP is not associated with a higher incidence of other sexually transmitted infections were all factors significantly associated with having a positive attitude towards HIV-PrEP. The issue of most concern to respondents who had a negative attitude toward HIV-PrEP was poor patient adherence to antiviral medications. Only 57% of respondents had confidence to prescribe HIV-PrEP. Factors associated with confidence to prescribe HIV-PrEP included being an ID physician, believing that HIV-PrEP can reduce the number of new patients, believing in the safety of antiviral medications, and believing that HIV-PrEP is not associated with increased development of HIV drug resistance. The results of HIV-PrEP knowledge testing (8 questions) were categorized into good score (≥7/8) and fair score (≤6/8). Fifty five percent of participants had a good score result. Using multivariate analysis, the factors associated with a good score result were ID physician, having HIV-PrEP prescription experience, and believing that HIV-PrEP can reduce the number of new patients.Most Thai healthcare providers (81%) reported having a positive attitude towards HIV-PrEP. Successful HIV-PrEP implementation in Thailand will require steps to mitigate the described barriers, and training for healthcare providers, which will strengthen knowledge and improve both experience with and confidence to prescribe HIV-PrEP.

Background The prescribing of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) remains a major means of reducing the incidence of HIV infection in the United States. Many individuals are unaware of their HIV status until further symptom progression has ensued or continue to engage in high-risk behavior despite awareness of the risk of HIV transmission. Primary care providers are instrumental in identifying patients who are at high risk of HIV acquisition and prescribing PrEP with appropriate counseling and monitoring. Methods In order to identify existing barriers to prescribing HIV PrEP at a single academic medical center, a voluntary 14-question de-identified survey was administered electronically to ambulatory care providers in the following departments: family medicine, internal medicine and geriatrics, adolescent and young adult health, student health, and women’s health clinics. Results Following survey dissemination, the response rate was 28% (82/286). The results are displayed in Tables 1-3. Notably, though 74% of survey respondents reported being familiar with CDC 2017 and USTPF 2019 clinical practice guidelines for PrEP prescribing, only 36% (22/61) were able to correctly identify the clinical scenarios in the survey whereby an individual is eligible for HIV PrEP. 57% (47/82) reported that they discuss HIV PrEP with less than 25% of eligible patients. Conclusion A significant proportion of healthcare providers at a major regional academic medical center are either not familiar with HIV PrEP prescribing clinical practice guidelines or are unable to appropriately identify situations whereby an individual meets eligibility for PrEP. In addition, a significant proportion do not discuss HIV PrEP with eligible patients. As such, data from the conducted survey will be used to inform the creation of clinical decision support tool to identify risk factors for HIV acquisition in patients, educate providers on guideline-based indications, and provide the option of a telePrEP referral service. Downstream effects anticipated from this intervention include increased HIV/STI testing, case identification, and increased rates of PrEP counseling and prescribing. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) remains underutilized despite its efficacy and potential population impact. Achieving PrEP's full potential depends on providers who are knowledgeable and comfortable prescribing it to individuals at risk of acquiring HIV. Previous educational interventions targeting provider-related uptake barriers have had limited success. We designed and tested an electronic medical record (EMR) interpretative comment to improve the delivery of PrEP. An EMR comment provided information on PrEP eligibility and referral resources to providers delivering positive chlamydia and gonorrhea results. Positive test results for bacterial sexually transmitted infections before intervention (January 1, 2019-August 23, 2019) and after intervention (August 24, 2019-December 31, 2019) were identified. A retrospective chart review was conducted to ascertain provider documentation of PrEP discussions or provision, HIV prevention discussions, and HIV screening. Pretest-posttest analysis was performed to compare the provision of PrEP and HIV prevention services. We reviewed 856 preintervention encounters spanning 8 months and 461 postencounters spanning 4 months. Patient demographics were comparable. We observed an increase in provider documentation of safe sex and condom counseling (odds ratios [ORs], 1.2 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.07-1.18] and 1.11 [95% CI, 1.05-1.17], respectively), and the absence of any HIV prevention discussion decreased (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.80-0.90), but not HIV screening or PrEP documentation. We demonstrated that an EMR laboratory comment had a modest effect on increasing risk reduction counseling, although not HIV screening or PrEP prescriptions. Future strategies to encourage provider delivery of sexual health services may benefit from more targeted strategies that combine behavioral and information technology approaches.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV is underutilized. We aimed to identify barriers to use of PrEP and strategies that may facilitate its uptake. Gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men, aged 19 years or older and living in Ontario and British Columbia, Canada, completed a cross-sectional survey in 2019-2020. Participants who met Canadian PrEP guideline criteria and were not already using PrEP identified relevant barriers and which strategies would make them more likely to start PrEP. We described the barriers and strategies separately for Ontario and BC. Of 1527 survey responses, 260 respondents who never used PrEP and met criteria for PrEP were included. In Ontario, the most common barriers were affordability (43%) and concern about adverse effects (42%). In BC, the most common reasons were concern about adverse effects (41%) and not feeling at high enough risk (36%). In Ontario, preferred strategies were short waiting time (63%), the health care provider informing about their HIV risk being higher than perceived (62%), and a written step-by-step guide (60%). In BC, strategies were short waiting time (68%), people speaking publicly about PrEP (68%), and the health care provider counselling about their HIV risk being higher than perceived (64%), adverse effects of PrEP (65%) and how well PrEP works (62%). Concern about adverse effects and not self-identifying as having high risk for HIV were common barriers, and shorter waiting times may increase PrEP uptake. In Ontario, the findings suggested lack of affordability, whereas in BC, strategies involving health care providers were valued.

The Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme was changed on 15 January 2021 to provide people aged <18 years access to government-subsidised pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV. This study investigated healthcare and service providers' attitudes and practices in discussing PrEP and impacts on PrEP prescribing practices, and the differences in the provision of PrEP to young adults aged >18years compared with people aged <18years. An online cross-sectional survey, conducted February to November 2023, used purposive, convenience and snowball sampling to recruit healthcare providers eligible to prescribe PrEP (GPs, nurse practitioners) and non-prescribing healthcare/service providers (sexual health nurses, HIV community workers) in Australia. Young people were split into three age groups for comparison between young adults (aged 18-24 years) and adolescents, including those above (aged 16-17 years) and below (<16 years) the age of consent in Australia. Cross-tabulation with Pearson's chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were performed to investigate sexual health and PrEP-related attitudes and practices. Of the 122 respondents, 40.2% (49/122) were nurses, 18.0% (22/122) GPs, 11.5% (14/122) HIV community workers, 11.5% (14/122) were another profession (including public health physician, LGBTIQA child and family practitioner, social worker, counsellor), 10.7% (13/122) were sexual health physicians, 6.6% (8/122) nurse practitioners and two were HIV specialists. Most (73.8%, 90/122) reported initiating PrEP conversations with 18-24-year-olds, compared with 13.1% (16/122) with those aged >16years. Of the 48 (39.3%) eligible PrEP prescribers, 47.9% (23/48) reported feeling 'extremely/somewhat' comfortable assessing PrEP eligibility, 41.7% (20/48) reported awareness of 2021 Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme changes and 18.8% (9/48) reported changes to prescribing practices. Prescribers were significantly more likely than non-prescribers to consider PrEP suitable (54.2% vs 35.8%, P<0.05) for clients aged <16 years. Guidelines and prescribing criteria need to reflect current Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme eligibility for young people to support healthcare prescriber decision-making in recommending and prescribing PrEP for HIV for young people where appropriate. Greater education, training and support is required for healthcare providers to improve provider confidence in discussing sexual health needs, and recommending and prescribing PrEP to young people to optimise the possible benefits of access to sexual health services and PrEP in this priority sub-group.

Prevention of new HIV infections is crucial for controlling the HIV epidemic. Despite HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) being one of the highly effective approaches to preventing HIV, and being freely available through primary healthcare clinics (PHCs), the uptake of HIV PrEP in South Africa (SA) is low. To understand knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAPs) of healthcare workers responsible for generating demand for HIV PrEP services, or identifying clients eligible for HIV PrEP services in PHCs in Ekurhuleni District, South Africa. We conducted a cross-sectional interviewer-administered survey among healthcare workers from 45 randomly selected PHCs in Ekurhuleni District. We collected information on participant characteristics and their KAPs regarding HIV PrEP service delivery. KAP scores were developed using a priori cut-off points and participants were categorised into binary levels of KAPs. We performed descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analysis in line with the study objectives. We enrolled 160 study participants from 1 May to 30 June 2022. About two-thirds of the participants (64.4%) were highly knowledgeable about HIV PrEP, and 58.1% self-reported practices that were considered to be good. Notably, 73.1% of participants had negative attitudes toward HIV PrEP delivery. Participants who were aged >50 years had poor HIV PrEP knowledge (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.0 - 0.4; p=0.01) compared with participants <30 years old. Participants aged 30 - 40 years had poor HIV knowledge although their association is not statistically significant. Nurses had higher HIV PrEP knowledge (aOR 11.1; 95% CI 3.8 - 32.4, p<0.001) compared with health promoters. Both nurses (aOR=0.2, 95% CI 0.1 - 0.6; p<0.001) and HIV testing service counsellors (aOR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1 - 0.9; p=0.02) had negative attitudes toward HIV PrEP, compared with health promoters. Nurses had better practices in HIV PrEP delivery compared with health promoters (aOR 2.5; 95% CI 1.0 - 5.9; p=0.04). Among the healthcare workers tasked with generating demand and identifying clients eligible for HIV PrEP services, low knowledge of HIV PrEP and negative attitudes towards HIV PrEP may be barriers to the uptake of HIV PrEP. Training healthcare workers on HIV PrEP is recommended.