Abstract

In India, the identity of men who have sex with men (MSM) is closely related to the role taken in anal sex (insertive, receptive or both), but little is known about sexual mixing between identity groups. Both role segregation (taking only the insertive or receptive role) and the extent of assortative (within-group) mixing are known to affect HIV epidemic size in other settings and populations. This study explores how different possible mixing scenarios, consistent with behavioural data collected in Bangalore, south India, affect both the HIV epidemic, and the impact of a targeted intervention. Deterministic models describing HIV transmission between three MSM identity groups (mostly insertive Panthis/Bisexuals, mostly receptive Kothis/Hijras and versatile Double Deckers), were parameterised with behavioural data from Bangalore. We extended previous models of MSM role segregation to allow each of the identity groups to have both insertive and receptive acts, in differing ratios, in line with field data. The models were used to explore four different mixing scenarios ranging from assortative (maximising within-group mixing) to disassortative (minimising within-group mixing). A simple model was used to obtain insights into the relationship between the degree of within-group mixing, R0 and equilibrium HIV prevalence under different mixing scenarios. A more complex, extended version of the model was used to compare the predicted HIV prevalence trends and impact of an HIV intervention when fitted to data from Bangalore. With the simple model, mixing scenarios with increased amounts of assortative (within-group) mixing tended to give rise to a higher R0 and increased the likelihood that an epidemic would occur. When the complex model was fit to HIV prevalence data, large differences in the level of assortative mixing were seen between the fits identified using different mixing scenarios, but little difference was projected in future HIV prevalence trends. An oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) intervention was modelled, targeted at the different identity groups. For intervention strategies targeting the receptive or receptive and versatile MSM together, the overall impact was very similar for different mixing patterns. However, for PrEP scenarios targeting insertive or versatile MSM alone, the overall impact varied considerably for different mixing scenarios; more impact was achieved with greater levels of disassortative mixing.

Highlights

  • Text 1: Mixing matrices 1.1 Mixing matrix with maximum assortative mixing The maximum number of receptive acts that members of group i can have with other members of the same group, group i, is derived first, as the smaller of their total number of insertive and receptive acts, min(Insi, receptive acts that group i has (Reci)), where min = minimum

  • The probability that, if an individual in group i has a receptive act, it is with an individual in group j, is calculated as the number of receptive acts that group i has with group j, divided by the total number of receptive acts for group i (Reci), with a similar calculation used for the insertive act probabilities

  • The number of receptive acts that KH have with PB is maximised, by calculating the smaller of the total number of receptive acts for KH and insertive acts for PB: (min(InsPB, RecKH))

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The mixing matrix for insertive acts is given by: ρIns,KH,KH ρIns = The number of receptive acts that DD have with other DD is maximised, as the smaller of the total number of insertive and receptive acts for DD (min(InsDD, RecDD)). The number of receptive acts that KH have with PB is maximised, by calculating the smaller of the total number of receptive acts for KH and insertive acts for PB: (min(InsPB, RecKH)).

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call