Prediction of HIV Acquisition Among Men Who Have Sex with Men

Center for AIDS and STD, University of Washington, Harborview Medical Center, 325 Ninth Ave., Seattle, WA 98104, USA.
Sexually transmitted diseases (Impact Factor: 2.84). 10/2009; 36(9):547-55. DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181a9cc41
Source: PubMed


To develop and validate an easy-to-use prediction model for HIV acquisition among men who have sex with men (MSM).
We developed prediction models using medical records data from an STD clinic (2001-2008) and validated these models using data from the control arm of Project Explore, an HIV prevention trial (1999-2003).
Of 1903 MSM who tested for HIV more than once in the development sample, 101 acquired HIV over 6.7 years of follow-up. Annual HIV incidence was 2.57% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.09%, 3.12%). During 4 years of follow-up of 2081 Project Explore control arm participants, 144 acquired HIV for an incidence of 2.32% (95% CI: 1.96%, 2.73%). A prediction model that included variables indicating use of methamphetamine or inhaled nitrites in the prior 6 months, unprotected anal intercourse with a partner of positive or unknown HIV status in the prior year, > or =10 male sex partners in the prior year, and current diagnosis or history of bacterial sexually transmitted infection was well calibrated overall (expected-observed ratio = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.97, 1.05) and had modest discriminatory accuracy at 1 year (area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.60, 0.75) and at 4 years (area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.61, 0.71). Over 4 years, cumulative incidence ranged from 3.9% to 14.3% for groups of men defined by the prediction model.
A new risk score was predictive of HIV acquisition and could assist providers in counseling MSM and in targeting intensified prevention to MSM at greatest risk for HIV infection. Its accuracy requires further evaluation.

5 Reads
  • Source
    • "Rates among young MSM and those who attend circuit parties are even higher [3-5]. MA use among MSM has been associated with a variety of high-risk sexual activities [6-9] as well as prevalent [10, 11] and incident HIV infections [12, 13]. MA use has been associated with higher frequencies of unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) among users [14]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is an ongoing need for the development and adaptation of behavioral interventions to address behaviors related to acquisition and transmission of infectious diseases and for preventing the onset of chronic diseases. This paper describes the application of an established systematic approach to the development of a behavioral intervention to reduce sexual risk behaviors for HIV among men who have sex with men and who use methamphetamine. The approach includes six steps: (1) a needs assessment; (2) preparing matrices of proximal program objectives; (3) selecting theory-based methods and practical strategies; (4) producing program components and materials; (5) planning for program adoption, implementation, and sustainability; and (6) planning for evaluation. The focus of this article is on the intervention development process; therefore the article does not describe steps 5 and 6. Overall the process worked well, although it had to be adapted to fit the sequence of events associated with a funded research project. This project demonstrates that systematic approaches to intervention development can be applied even in research projects where some of the steps occur during the proposal writing process rather than during the actual project. However, intervention developers must remain flexible and be prepared to adapt the process to the situation. This includes being ready to make choices regarding intervention efficacy versus feasibility and being willing to select the best intervention that is likely to be delivered with available resources rather than an ideal intervention that may not be practical.
    The Open AIDS Journal 05/2010; 4(3):132-40. DOI:10.2174/1874613601004030132
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently recommended the expansion of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibody testing. However, antibody tests have longer "window periods" after HIV acquisition than do nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs). Public Health-Seattle & King County offered HIV antibody testing to men who have sex with men (MSM) using the OraQuick Advance Rapid HIV-1/2 Antibody Test (OraQuick; OraSure Technologies) on oral fluid or finger-stick blood specimens or using a first- or second-generation enzyme immunoassay. The enzyme immunoassay was also used to confirm reactive rapid test results and to screen specimens from OraQuick-negative MSM prior to pooling for HIV NAAT. Serum specimens obtained from subsets of HIV-infected persons were retrospectively evaluated by use of other HIV tests, including a fourth-generation antigen-antibody combination assay. From September 2003 through June 2008, a total of 328 (2.3%) of 14,005 specimens were HIV antibody positive, and 36 (0.3%) of 13,677 antibody-negative specimens were NAAT positive (indicating acute HIV infection). Among 6811 specimens obtained from MSM who were initially screened by rapid testing, OraQuick detected only 153 (91%) of 169 antibody-positive MSM and 80% of the 192 HIV-infected MSM detected by the HIV NAAT program. HIV was detected in serum samples obtained from 15 of 16 MSM with acute HIV infection that were retrospectively tested using the antigen-antibody combination assay. OraQuick may be less sensitive than enzyme immunoassays during early HIV infection. NAAT should be integrated into HIV testing programs that serve populations that undergo frequent testing and that have high rates of HIV acquisition, particularly if rapid HIV antibody testing is employed. Antigen-antibody combination assays may be a reasonably sensitive alternative to HIV NAAT.
    Clinical Infectious Diseases 06/2009; 49(3):444-53. DOI:10.1086/600043 · 8.89 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Relatively few studies have addressed the psychometric properties of self-report measures of amphetamine use. This study examines the reliability and validity of the Risk Behavior Assessment's (RBA) lifetime and recent amphetamine-use questions. To evaluate validity, 4027 out-of-treatment primarily cocaine and heroin users provided urine samples that were compared to self-report data; to evaluate reliability, 218 completed the RBA at two time points, 48h apart. In the overall sample, self-reports demonstrated moderately high validity, with a 95% accuracy rate (kappa=.54). When analysis was restricted to recent amphetamine users validity was slightly lower (71.5% accuracy; kappa=.41). Test-retest data indicated good reliability for self-reports of ever having used amphetamine (kappa=.79), and amphetamine use in the past 30 days (.75<r<.91). Out-of-treatment drug users provided accurate self-reports of amphetamine use. Reliable and valid measures are essential for describing and predicting trends in amphetamine use, evaluating the effectiveness of interventions, and developing policies and programs.
    Addictive behaviors 04/2010; 35(4):350-4. DOI:10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.12.006 · 2.76 Impact Factor
Show more


5 Reads
Available from