Jenness Samuel M, Sharma Akshay, Goodreau Steven M, Rosenberg Eli S, Weiss Kevin M, Hoover Karen W, Smith Dawn K, Sullivan Patrick
Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 6;12(1):e0169484. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169484. eCollection 2017.
OBJECTIVES: Risk compensation (RC) could reduce or offset the biological prevention benefits of HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among those at substantial risk of infection, including men who have sex with men (MSM). We investigated the potential extent and causal mechanisms through which RC could impact HIV transmission at the population and individual levels. METHODS: Using a stochastic network-based mathematical model of HIV transmission dynamics among MSM in the United States, we simulated RC as a reduction in the probability of condom use after initiating PrEP, with heterogeneity by PrEP adherence profiles and partnership type in which RC occurred. Outcomes were changes to population-level HIV incidence and individual-level acquisition risk. RESULTS: When RC was limited to MSM highly/moderately adherent to PrEP, 100% RC (full replacement of condoms) resulted in a 2% relative decline in incidence compared to no RC, but an 8% relative increase in infection risk for MSM on PrEP. This resulted from confounding by indication: RC increased the number of MSM indicated for PrEP as a function of more condomless anal intercourse among men otherwise not indicated for PrEP; this led to an increased PrEP uptake and subsequent decline in incidence. CONCLUSIONS: RC is unlikely to decrease the prevention impact of PrEP, and in some cases RC may be counterintuitively beneficial at the population level. This depended on PrEP uptake scaling with behavioral indications. Due to the increased acquisition risk associated with RC, however, clinicians should continue to support PrEP as a supplement rather than replacement of condoms.
目的:风险补偿(RC)可能会降低或抵消暴露前预防(PrEP)对包括男男性行为者(MSM)在内的高感染风险人群的生物学预防益处。我们调查了RC在人群和个体层面影响HIV传播的潜在程度和因果机制。 方法:我们使用基于随机网络的美国男男性行为者中HIV传播动力学数学模型,将RC模拟为开始PrEP后使用避孕套概率的降低,并根据PrEP依从性概况和发生RC的性伴类型进行分层。结果是人群层面HIV发病率和个体层面感染风险的变化。 结果:当RC仅限于高度/中度依从PrEP的男男性行为者时,与无RC相比,100%的RC(完全取代避孕套)导致发病率相对下降2%,但PrEP使用者的感染风险相对增加8%。这是由指征性混杂导致的:RC增加了因PrEP而被推荐使用PrEP的男男性行为者数量,这是因为在原本不适合使用PrEP的男性中无保护肛交增多;这导致PrEP使用率增加,随后发病率下降。 结论:RC不太可能降低PrEP的预防效果,在某些情况下,RC在人群层面可能会产生与直觉相反的益处。这取决于PrEP使用率与行为指征的关联。然而,由于与RC相关的感染风险增加,临床医生应继续支持将PrEP作为避孕套的补充而非替代品。
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2016-4-21
Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2016-1