Dataset Information

Risk of HIV transmission through condomless sex in serodifferent gay couples with the HIV-positive partner taking suppressive antiretroviral therapy (PARTNER): final results of a multicentre, prospective, observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The level of evidence for HIV transmission risk through condomless sex in serodifferent gay couples with the HIV-positive partner taking virally suppressive antiretroviral therapy (ART) is limited compared with the evidence available for transmission risk in heterosexual couples. The aim of the second phase of the PARTNER study (PARTNER2) was to provide precise estimates of transmission risk in gay serodifferent partnerships.

Methods

The PARTNER study was a prospective observational study done at 75 sites in 14 European countries. The first phase of the study (PARTNER1; Sept 15, 2010, to May 31, 2014) recruited and followed up both heterosexual and gay serodifferent couples (HIV-positive partner taking suppressive ART) who reported condomless sex, whereas the PARTNER2 extension (to April 30, 2018) recruited and followed up gay couples only. At study visits, data collection included sexual behaviour questionnaires, HIV testing (HIV-negative partner), and HIV-1 viral load testing (HIV-positive partner). If a seroconversion occurred in the HIV-negative partner, anonymised phylogenetic analysis was done to compare HIV-1 pol and env sequences in both partners to identify linked transmissions. Couple-years of follow-up were eligible for inclusion if condomless sex was reported, use of pre-exposure prophylaxis or post-exposure prophylaxis was not reported by the HIV-negative partner, and the HIV-positive partner was virally suppressed (plasma HIV-1 RNA <200 copies per mL) at the most recent visit (within the past year). Incidence rate of HIV transmission was calculated as the number of phylogenetically linked HIV infections that occurred during eligible couple-years of follow-up divided by eligible couple-years of follow-up. Two-sided 95% CIs for the incidence rate of transmission were calculated using exact Poisson methods.

Findings

Between Sept 15, 2010, and July 31, 2017, 972 gay couples were enrolled, of which 782 provided 1593 eligible couple-years of follow-up with a median follow-up of 2·0 years (IQR 1·1-3·5). At baseline, median age for HIV-positive partners was 40 years (IQR 33-46) and couples reported condomless sex for a median of 1·0 years (IQR 0·4-2·9). During eligible couple-years of follow-up, couples reported condomless anal sex a total of 76 088 times. 288 (37%) of 777 HIV-negative men reported condomless sex with other partners. 15 new HIV infections occurred during eligible couple-years of follow-up, but none were phylogenetically linked within-couple transmissions, resulting in an HIV transmission rate of zero (upper 95% CI 0·23 per 100 couple-years of follow-up).

Interpretation

Our results provide a similar level of evidence on viral suppression and HIV transmission risk for gay men to that previously generated for heterosexual couples and suggest that the risk of HIV transmission in gay couples through condomless sex when HIV viral load is suppressed is effectively zero. Our findings support the message of the U=U (undetectable equals untransmittable) campaign, and the benefits of early testing and treatment for HIV.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research.

SUBMITTER: Rodger AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6584382 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Most HIV cure-related studies involve interrupting antiretroviral treatment to assess the efficacy of pharmacologic interventions – also known as analytical treatment interruptions (ATIs). ATIs imply the risk of passing HIV to sexual partners due to the loss of undetectable HIV status. There has been a notable lack of attention paid to perceptions of ATIs among racial, ethnic, sex and gender minorities, and HIV serodifferent couples. These populations are among those most impacted by HIV in the United States. Future HIV cure research paradigms should equitably include considerations from these groups. Methods From August – October 2020, we conducted in-depth interviews with 10 racial, ethnic, sex, and gender minority HIV serodifferent couples in geographically diverse regions of the United States to understand their perspectives about ATIs and partner protection measures to prevent secondary HIV transmissions because of participation in ATI studies. We used framework analysis to analyze the qualitative data. Results Of the 10 couples recruited, four identified as a gay couple, two as a gay and bisexual couple, two as a heterosexual couple, one as a gay and queer couple, and one as a queer couple. We found that HIV serodifferent couples in our study viewed ATIs as contradicting HIV treatment adherence messages. Couples expressed discomfort around ATIs in HIV cure research. They were concerned with the return of HIV detectability and worried ATIs might result in secondary HIV transmission. Participants were strongly in favor of using a range of partner protection measures during ATIs that included PrEP, HIV risk reduction counseling, and alternatives for penetrative sex practices. Couples also recommended that sex partners be consulted or involved as part of ATI trials. Conclusions Our findings highlight new potential opportunities and strategies to mitigate risk of HIV transmission during ATIs among key groups historically under-represented in HIV cure research. Findings also underscore the relational aspects of ATI trials. We provide preliminary considerations for planning ATI trials with diverse HIV serodifferent partners. Future studies should continue to explore these issues among other types of partnerships, cultures, and socio-cultural settings. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-13528-8.

Project description:BackgroundIntimate partner violence (IPV) is a major public health problem and is the most common form of violence against women. Women with HIV in serodifferent relationships may be at an increased risk of IPV compared to women without HIV, hindering their ability to adhere to antiretroviral therapy, clinic appointments, and condom use during sex. This study assessed the prevalence and correlates of IPV in the past year among women with HIV in serodifferent relationships in Nairobi, Kenya.MethodsThis cross-sectional study included women with HIV in serodifferent relationships who were at least 18 years old and provided written informed consent. Their experience of physical, sexual, or emotional violence in the past year by the current partner was assessed using 13 questions adapted from the World Health Organization survey on violence against women. Standardized instruments were used to assess sociodemographic and behavioral factors. Associations between intimate partner violence and other variables were evaluated using log binomial regression models.ResultsOf the 159 women enrolled, 47 (29.6%, 95% CI 22.9-37.2%) reported IPV in the past year. Of these, 32 (68.1%) reported emotional, 27 (57.4%) physical, and 27 (57.4%) sexual violence. In the multivariate model, pregnancy (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 2.14, 95% CI 1.09-4.20), alcohol use (minimal drinking aPR 1.91, 95% CI 1.10-3.33; moderate/severe drinking aPR 1.17, 95% CI 0.53-2.59), male partner controlling behavior (aPR 2.09, 95% CI 1.24-3.51), and past physical violence (aPR 1.93, 95% CI 1.22-3.05) remained significantly associated with a higher prevalence of IPV in the past year.ConclusionThis study identified a high prevalence of IPV in the past year among women with HIV in serodifferent relationships. Pregnant women and women who had experienced prior violence had a higher prevalence of IPV. These data highlight the need to screen for IPV during clinic visits, and to offer evidence based interventions to support women in serodifferent relationships who have experienced IPV.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Antiretroviral drugs have been shown to reduce risk of mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and are also widely used for post-exposure prophylaxis for parenteral and sexual exposures. Sexual transmission may be lower in couples in which one partner is infected with HIV and the other is not and the infected partner is on antiretroviral therapy (ART). OBJECTIVES:To determine if ART use in an HIV-infected member of an HIV-discordant couple is associated with lower risk of HIV transmission to the uninfected partner compared to untreated discordant couples. SEARCH METHODS:We used standard Cochrane methods to search electronic databases and conference proceedings with relevant search terms without limits to language. SELECTION CRITERIA:Randomised controlled trials (RCT), cohort studies and case-control studies of HIV-discordant couples in which the HIV-infected member of the couple was being treated or not treated with ART DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Abstracts of all trials identified by electronic or bibliographic scanning were examined independently by two authors. We initially identified 3,833 references and examined 87 in detail for study eligibility. Data were abstracted independently using a standardised abstraction form. MAIN RESULTS:One RCT and nine observational studies were included in the review. These ten studies identified 2,112 episodes of HIV transmission, 1,016 among treated couples and 1,096 among untreated couples. The rate ratio for the single randomised controlled trial was 0.04 [95% CI 0.00, 0.27]. All index partners in this study had CD4 cell counts at baseline of 350-550 cells/µL. Similarly, the summary rate ratio for the nine observational studies was 0.58 [95% CI 0.35, 0.96], with substantial heterogeneity (I(2)=64%). After excluding two studies with inadequate person-time data, we estimated a summary rate ratio of 0.36 [95% CI 0.17, 0.75] with substantial heterogeneity (I(2)=62%). We also performed subgroup analyses among the observational studies to see if the effect of ART on prevention of HIV differed by the index partner's CD4 cell count. Among couples in which the infected partner had ?350 CD4 cells/µL, we estimated a rate ratio of 0.12 [95% CI 0.01, 1.99]. In this subgroup, there were 247 transmissions in untreated couples and 30 in treated couples. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:ART is a potent intervention for prevention of HIV in discordant couples in which the index partner has ?550 CD4 cells/µL. A recent multicentre RCT confirms the suspected benefit seen in earlier observational studies and reported in more recent ones. Questions remain about durability of protection, the balance of benefits and adverse events associated with earlier therapy, long-term adherence and transmission of ART-resistant strains to partners. Resource limitations and implementation challenges must also be addressed.Counselling, support, and follow up, as well as mutual disclosure, may have a role in supporting adherence, so programmes should be designed with these components. In addition to ART provision, the operational aspects of delivering such programmes must be considered.

Project description:IntroductionHIV transmission within serodifferent heterosexual couples plays a key role in sustaining the global HIV pandemic. In the USA, transmission within established mixed-status couples accounts for up to half of all new HIV infections among heterosexuals. Oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a highly effective prevention method, although underutilised among serodifferent couples. Moreover, there is a dearth of research on US HIV-serodifferent couples' perspectives and use of PrEP, alone or in combination with other prevention methods. In this paper, we describe the study protocol for the Magnetic Couples Study, designed to fill critical knowledge gaps regarding HIV-serodifferent heterosexual couples' perspectives, experiences and utilisation of PrEP.Methods and analysisThe Magnetic Couples Study is a mixed methods prospective cohort study designed to describe temporal patterns and identify determinants at multiple levels (individual, couple, HCF) of PrEP outcomes along the care continuum (PrEP awareness, linkage, uptake, retention and medication adherence) among HIV-serodifferent heterosexual couples residing in New York City. The study will also examine clinical management of PrEP, side effects and changes in sexual-related and substance use-related behaviour. A prospective cohort of 230 mixed-status couples already on oral PrEP was recruited, with quarterly assessments over 18 months; in addition, a cross-sectional sample of 150 mixed-status couples not currently on PrEP was recruited. In-depth semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with a subsample of 25 couples. Actor-partner interdependence modelling using multilevel analysis will be employed for the analysis of longitudinal dyadic data. Framework analysis will be used to analyse qualitative data. A parallel convergent design will be used for mixed methods integration.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the University of Rochester Institutional Review Board (RSRB00052766). Study findings will be disseminated to community members and providers and to researchers and policy makers.

Project description:Antiretroviral treatment (ART) and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV-serodiscordant couples, effectively reduce mortality, transmission events and influence quality of life at the expense of increased costs. We aimed to evaluate health economics of antiretroviral-based strategies for HIV-serodiscordant couples in the China context. A deterministic model of HIV evolution and transmission within a cohort of serodiscordant couples was parameterized using the real-world database of Zhoukou city and published literature. We evaluated the mid-ART (a historical strategy, initiating ART with CD4 < 500 cells/mm3), early-ART (the current strategy, offering ART regardless of CD4 cell counts) and a hypothetical strategy (early-ART combined short-term daily PrEP) versus the late-ART (the baseline strategy, initiating ART with CD4 < 350 cells/mm3) offered by 2008 national guidelines. We estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) from a societal perspective, derived by clinical benefits and HIV-caused life quality respectively, and portrayed their changes over a 0-30 year's timeframe. The model projections indicated that the antiretroviral-based interventions were more likely to obtain clinical benefits but difficult to improve quality of life, and cumulative ICER and ICUR were generally decreasing without achieving cost-saving. Scale-up access to ART for the HIV-positive among serodiscordant couples was easily fallen within the range of paying for incremental life-years and quality adjusted life years by the societal willingness. The hypothetical strategy had the potential to prevent most seroconversion events within marriages but required enormous upfront costs, thus it took a long time to reach established thresholds. The current strategy of early-ART is the most cost-effective. Clarifying the obstacles of high cost of PrEP and improving life quality for HIV-serodiscordant couples have emerged as an urgent requisition.

Project description:BackgroundThe administration of broadly neutralising anti-HIV-1 antibodies before latency reversal could facilitate elimination of HIV-1-infected CD4 T cells. We tested this concept by combining the broadly neutralising antibody 3BNC117 in combination with the latency-reversing agent romidepsin in people with HIV-1 who were taking suppressive antiretroviral therapy (ART).MethodsWe did a randomised, open-label, phase 2A trial at three university hospital centres in Denmark, Germany, and the USA. Eligible participants were virologically suppressed adults aged 18-65 years who were infected with HIV-1 and on ART for at least 18 months, with plasma HIV-1 RNA concentrations of less than 50 copies per mL for at least 12 months, and a CD4 T-cell count of greater than 500 cells per μL. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 3BNC117 plus romidepsin or romidepsin alone in two cycles. All participants received intravenous infusions of romidepsin (5 mg/m2 given over 120 min) at weeks 0, 1, and 2 (treatment cycle 1) and weeks 8, 9, and 10 (treatment cycle 2). Those in the 3BNC117 plus romidepsin group received an intravenous infusion of 3BNC117 (30 mg/kg given over 60 min) 2 days before each treatment cycle. An analytic treatment interruption (ATI) of ART was done at week 24 in both groups. Our primary endpoint was time to viral rebound during analytic treatment interruption, which was assessed in all participants who completed both treatment cycles and ATI. We used a log-rank test to compare time to viral rebound during analytic treatment interruption between the two groups. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02850016. It is closed to new participants, and all follow-up is complete.FindingsBetween March 20, 2017, and Aug 14, 2018, 22 people were enrolled and randomly assigned, 11 to the 3BNC117 plus romidepsin group and 11 to the romidepsin group. 19 participants completed both treatment cycles and the ATI: 11 in the 3BNC117 plus romidepsin group and 8 in the romidepsin group. The median time to viral rebound during ATI was 18 days (IQR 14-28) in the 3BNC117 plus romidepsin group and 28 days (21-35) in the romidepsin group B (p=0·0016). Although this difference was significant, prolongation of time to viral rebound was not clinically meaningful in either group. All participants in both groups reported adverse events, but overall the combination of 3BNC117 and romidepsin was safe. Two severe adverse events were observed in the romidepsin group during 48 weeks of follow-up, one of which-increased direct bilirubin-was judged to be related to treatment.InterpretationThe combination of 3BNC117 and romidepsin was safe but did not delay viral rebound during analytic treatment interruptions in individuals on long-term ART. The results of our trial could serve as a benchmark for further optimisation of HIV-1 curative strategies among people with HIV-1 who are taking suppressive ART.FundingamfAR, German Center for Infection Research.