Sexual network and detection of anogenital human papillomavirus in a community cohort of men who have sex with men in Taiwan

Abstract

Objectives We examined the association between anogenital human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and sexual networks in men who have sex with men (MSM). Methods A total of 253 MSM, 20 years of age and older, were recruited from the community in Southern Taiwan in 2015–2016. At baseline and at each follow-up visit, MSM were screened for HPV to identify 37 HPV genotypes. At the six-month follow-up, MSM were asked to fill out an egocentric network assessment and to report the last five persons with whom they had sex regarding the characteristics of sexual behavior with each network member. Results A total of 182 participants (71.9%) returned for the follow-up and one third had at least one HPV type detected. A higher level of bridging network position calculated by the level of constraints in the network was significantly less likely to have HPV detection at the anal site. A high level of concurrency was associated with penile HPV detection (AOR = 3.16, 95% CI = 1.01–9.86). Conclusions Identifying network-related characteristics can advance our understanding of high-risk populations and for prioritizing HPV vaccine recommendations.

Incidence, persistence, and clearance of anogenital human papillomavirus among men who have sex with men in Taiwan: a community cohort study

“…Anal and penile HPV testing for participants was provided at baseline and each follow-up at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Details about the study recruitment have been described previously ( 19 – 21 ). Participants who completed the questionnaire and had taken part in at least one follow-up were included in the present study.…”

“…HPV DNA testing and genotyping were performed using the linear array HPV genotyping test (Roche Molecular Diagnostics, Pleasanton, CA, USA) with good type-specific reproducibility and reliability to identify 37 HPV genotypes ( 22 ), including 21 high-risk (16, 18, 26, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 53, 56, 58, 59, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 73 [MM9], 82 [MM4]) and 16 low-risk HPV genotypes (6, 11, 40, 42, 54, 55, 61, 62, 64, 71 [CP8061], 72, 81 [CP8304], 83 [MM7], 84 [MM8], 82v, 89). Details about HPV specimen collection and detection procedures have been reported previously ( 20 , 21 ).…”

Partner-Level and Sexual Networking Factors Are Associated With Vaccine-Type and Nonvaccine-Type Human Papillomavirus Infection After Vaccine Introduction in Young Women

“…In a sample of unvaccinated adult women in the United States, those who reported a concurrent partnership had an increased risk of a high-risk HPV infection 14 . In a study of adult Taiwanese men who have sex with men, concurrency was associated with penile HPV detection 15 . Finally, in a study of 13- to 26-year-old young men in the United States, partner concurrency was associated with HPV-16/18 detection in unvaccinated and vaccinated men 16 .…”

“…14 In a study of adult Taiwanese men who have sex with men, concurrency was associated with penile HPV detection. 15 Finally, in a study of 13-to 26-year-old young men in the United States, partner concurrency was associated with HPV-16/18 detection in unvaccinated and vaccinated men. 16 Our findings imply that young women whose partners practice concurrency are at elevated risk for HPV in the post-HPV-vaccination era and should be targeted for education about cervical cancer prevention through safer sexual behaviors, vaccination (if unvaccinated), and cervical cancer screening when indicated.…”

“…Discordance may be a marker for engaging in riskier sexual behaviors; for example, if it leads to a limited ability to negotiate condom use, and concurrency increases the risk of STI transmission. Discordance and concurrency have been shown to be associated with bacterial STIs and HIV, 10–12 but few studies have explored associations with HPV, and those studies were largely conducted in adult populations 13–17 . Furthermore, data are needed regarding whether risk factors for HPV are different after HPV vaccines were introduced, whether factors associated with HPV differ for vaccine-type and non–vaccine-type HPV, and whether any associations vary by vaccination status.…”