BackgroundIn 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 FindingsCross-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).ConclusionsAmong 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.

Purpose U.S. health surveillance systems infrequently include measures to identify transgender respondents or monitor the health of this underserved and marginalized population. Methods From 2001–2002, transgender and non-transgender adults were sampled at a Massachusetts clinic. Health differences were formatively examined by transgender identity using a cross-sectional, clinic-based sample (n=2,653); and a nested matched-pair subsample (n=155). Results Both designs produced virtually identical findings: (1) the prevalence of HIV, substance abuse, and smoking did not differ significantly for transgender and non-transgender patients; (2) transgender patients were more likely to endorse a lifetime suicide attempt and ideation compared to non-transgender patients (p<0.05); (3) transgender patients disproportionately reported social stressors (violence, discrimination, childhood abuse) relative to non-transgender patients (p<0.05). Conclusion Findings suggest that a nested design may provide an effective methodology for using clinical data to study transgender health, and underscore the need for routine collection of gender identity in clinical settings.

The Center for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (CAPRISA) 004 and Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Initiative (iPrEx) studies demonstrated that topical or oral chemoprophylaxis could decrease HIV transmission. Yet to have an appreciable public health impact, physicians will need to be educated about these new HIV prevention modalities. Massachusetts physicians were recruited via e-mail to complete an online survey of their knowledge and use of HIV prevention interventions. Data were collected before (July-December, 2010) (n=178) and after (December, 2010-April, 2011) (n=115) the release of iPrEx data. Over the two time intervals, knowledge of oral PrEP significantly increased (79% to 92%, p<0.01), whereas knowledge about topical microbicides was already high (89% pre-iPrEx). Post-iPrEx, specialists were more knowledgeable about oral PrEP (p<0.01) and topical microbicides (p<0.001) than generalists. The majority of the respondents would prefer to prescribe topical microbicides (75%) than oral PrEP (25%; p<0.001), primarily because they perceived fewer side effects (95%). Respondents indicated that PrEP should be available if it were a highly effective, daily pill; however, ongoing concerns included: potential drug resistance (93%), decreased funds for other forms of HIV prevention (88%), medication side effects (83%), and limited data regarding PrEP's clinical efficacy (75%). Participants indicated that formal CDC guidelines would have the greatest impact on their willingness to prescribe PrEP (96%). Among Massachusetts physicians sampled, chemoprophylaxis knowledge was high, but current experience was limited. Although topical gel was preferred, responses suggest a willingness to adapt practices pending additional efficacy data and further guidance from normative bodies. Educational programs aimed at incorporating antiretroviral chemoprophylaxis into physicians' HIV prevention practices are warranted.

Background Transgender people have elevated substance use prevalence compared with the U.S. general population, however no studies have comprehensively examined the relationship of psychosocial risk factors to substance use and substance use disorder (SUD) treatment among both male-to-female (MTF) and female-to-male (FTM) transgender adults. Methods Secondary data analysis of a 2013 community-based survey of transgender adults in Massachusetts (N=452) was conducted. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression models were fit to examine the relationship of four risk factor domains with SUD treatment history and recent substance use: (1) demographics; (2) gender-related characteristics; (3) mental health; (4) socio-structural factors. Adjusted Odds Ratios (aOR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (95% CI) were estimated. Results Ten percent of the sample reported lifetime SUD treatment. Factors associated with significant increase in odds of lifetime SUD treatment alongside recent substance use (all p<0.05) were: (1) older age (aOR=1.02; 95% CI=1.01–1.04), higher educational attainment (aOR=3.59; 95% CI=2.35–5.50), low income (aOR=0.58; 95% CI=0.39–0.86); (2) MTF identity (aOR=3.03; 95% CI=1.95–4.67), gender-affirming medical care (aOR=1.99; 95% CI=1.32–3.00); (3) intimate partner violence (aOR=1.68; 95% CI=1.13–2.49), posttraumatic stress disorder (aOR = 2.56; 95% CI=1.69–3.88), depression (aOR=2.30; 95% CI=1.58–3.35), mental health treatment (aOR=1.65; 95% CI=1.11–2.45); (4) discrimination (aOR=1.90; 95% CI=1.22–2.95), unstable housing (aOR=1.80; 95% CI=1.21–2.67), and sex work (aOR=2.48; 95% CI=1.24–4.95). Conclusions Substance use and SUD treatment among transgender adults are associated with demographic, gender-related, mental health, and socio-structural risk factors. Studies are warranted that identify SUD treatment barriers, and integrate SUD treatment with psychosocial and structural interventions for a diverse spectrum of transgender adults.