Does per-act HIV-1 transmission risk through anal sex vary by gender? An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Rebecca F. Baggaley, Branwen N. Owen, Romain Silhol, Jocelyn Elmes, Peter Anton, Ian McGowan, Ariane van der Straten, Barbara Shacklett, Que Dang, Edith M. Swann, Diane L. Bolton, Marie Claude Boily

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Quantifying HIV-1 transmission risk per-act of anal intercourse (AI) is important for HIV-1 prevention. We updated previous reviews by searching Medline and Embase to 02/2018. We derived pooled estimates of receptive AI (URAI) and insertive AI (UIAI) risk unprotected by condoms using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses were conducted by gender, study design, and whether antiretroviral treatment (ART) had been introduced by the time of the study. Two new relevant studies were identified, one of which met inclusion criteria, adding three new cohorts and increasing number of individuals/partnerships included from 1869 to 14 277. Four studies, all from high-income countries, were included. Pooled HIV-1 risk was higher for URAI (1.25%, 95% CI 0.55%-2.23%, N = 5, I2 = 87%) than UIAI (0.17%, 95 % CI 0.09%-0.26%, N = 3, I2 = 0%). The sole heterosexual URAI estimate (3.38%, 95% CI 1.85%-4.91%), from a study of 72 women published in a peer-reviewed journal, was significantly higher than the men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) pooled estimate (0.75%, 95% CI 0.56%-0.98%, N = 4, P < 0.0001) and higher than the only other heterosexual estimate identified (0.4%, 95% CI 0.08%-2.0%, based on 59 women, excluded for being a pre-2013 abstract). Pooled per-act URAI risk varied by study design (retrospective-partner studies: 2.56%, 95% CI 1.20%-4.42%, N = 2 (one MSM, one heterosexual); prospective studies: 0.71%, 95% CI 0.51%-0.93%, N = 3 MSM, P < 0.0001). URAI risk was lower for studies conducted in the ART era (0.75%, 95% CI 0.52%-1.03%) than pre-ART (1.67%, 95% CI 0.44%-3.67%) but not significantly so (P = 0.537). Prevention messages must emphasize that HIV-1 infectiousness through AI remains high, even in the ART era. Further studies, particularly among heterosexual populations and in resource-limited settings, are required to elucidate whether AI risk differs by gender, region and following population-level ART scale-up.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere13039
JournalAmerican Journal of Reproductive Immunology
Volume80
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2018

Fingerprint

Sexual Behavior
Meta-Analysis
HIV-1
Heterosexuality
Therapeutics
Time and Motion Studies
Condoms
Population
Retrospective Studies
Prospective Studies

Keywords

  • anal intercourse
  • antiretroviral therapy
  • heterosexual
  • HIV
  • infectivity
  • meta-analysis
  • MSM
  • review
  • transmission probability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Immunology
  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Does per-act HIV-1 transmission risk through anal sex vary by gender? An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. / Baggaley, Rebecca F.; Owen, Branwen N.; Silhol, Romain; Elmes, Jocelyn; Anton, Peter; McGowan, Ian; van der Straten, Ariane; Shacklett, Barbara; Dang, Que; Swann, Edith M.; Bolton, Diane L.; Boily, Marie Claude.

In: American Journal of Reproductive Immunology, Vol. 80, No. 5, e13039, 01.11.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Baggaley, RF, Owen, BN, Silhol, R, Elmes, J, Anton, P, McGowan, I, van der Straten, A, Shacklett, B, Dang, Q, Swann, EM, Bolton, DL & Boily, MC 2018, 'Does per-act HIV-1 transmission risk through anal sex vary by gender? An updated systematic review and meta-analysis', American Journal of Reproductive Immunology, vol. 80, no. 5, e13039. https://doi.org/10.1111/aji.13039
Baggaley, Rebecca F. ; Owen, Branwen N. ; Silhol, Romain ; Elmes, Jocelyn ; Anton, Peter ; McGowan, Ian ; van der Straten, Ariane ; Shacklett, Barbara ; Dang, Que ; Swann, Edith M. ; Bolton, Diane L. ; Boily, Marie Claude. / Does per-act HIV-1 transmission risk through anal sex vary by gender? An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. In: American Journal of Reproductive Immunology. 2018 ; Vol. 80, No. 5.
@article{59a907956b0f4e21a8f09940acffc68c,
title = "Does per-act HIV-1 transmission risk through anal sex vary by gender? An updated systematic review and meta-analysis",
abstract = "Quantifying HIV-1 transmission risk per-act of anal intercourse (AI) is important for HIV-1 prevention. We updated previous reviews by searching Medline and Embase to 02/2018. We derived pooled estimates of receptive AI (URAI) and insertive AI (UIAI) risk unprotected by condoms using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses were conducted by gender, study design, and whether antiretroviral treatment (ART) had been introduced by the time of the study. Two new relevant studies were identified, one of which met inclusion criteria, adding three new cohorts and increasing number of individuals/partnerships included from 1869 to 14 277. Four studies, all from high-income countries, were included. Pooled HIV-1 risk was higher for URAI (1.25{\%}, 95{\%} CI 0.55{\%}-2.23{\%}, N = 5, I2 = 87{\%}) than UIAI (0.17{\%}, 95 {\%} CI 0.09{\%}-0.26{\%}, N = 3, I2 = 0{\%}). The sole heterosexual URAI estimate (3.38{\%}, 95{\%} CI 1.85{\%}-4.91{\%}), from a study of 72 women published in a peer-reviewed journal, was significantly higher than the men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) pooled estimate (0.75{\%}, 95{\%} CI 0.56{\%}-0.98{\%}, N = 4, P < 0.0001) and higher than the only other heterosexual estimate identified (0.4{\%}, 95{\%} CI 0.08{\%}-2.0{\%}, based on 59 women, excluded for being a pre-2013 abstract). Pooled per-act URAI risk varied by study design (retrospective-partner studies: 2.56{\%}, 95{\%} CI 1.20{\%}-4.42{\%}, N = 2 (one MSM, one heterosexual); prospective studies: 0.71{\%}, 95{\%} CI 0.51{\%}-0.93{\%}, N = 3 MSM, P < 0.0001). URAI risk was lower for studies conducted in the ART era (0.75{\%}, 95{\%} CI 0.52{\%}-1.03{\%}) than pre-ART (1.67{\%}, 95{\%} CI 0.44{\%}-3.67{\%}) but not significantly so (P = 0.537). Prevention messages must emphasize that HIV-1 infectiousness through AI remains high, even in the ART era. Further studies, particularly among heterosexual populations and in resource-limited settings, are required to elucidate whether AI risk differs by gender, region and following population-level ART scale-up.",
keywords = "anal intercourse, antiretroviral therapy, heterosexual, HIV, infectivity, meta-analysis, MSM, review, transmission probability",
author = "Baggaley, {Rebecca F.} and Owen, {Branwen N.} and Romain Silhol and Jocelyn Elmes and Peter Anton and Ian McGowan and {van der Straten}, Ariane and Barbara Shacklett and Que Dang and Swann, {Edith M.} and Bolton, {Diane L.} and Boily, {Marie Claude}",
year = "2018",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/aji.13039",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "80",
journal = "American Journal of Reproductive Immunology",
issn = "8755-8920",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does per-act HIV-1 transmission risk through anal sex vary by gender? An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

AU - Baggaley, Rebecca F.

AU - Owen, Branwen N.

AU - Silhol, Romain

AU - Elmes, Jocelyn

AU - Anton, Peter

AU - McGowan, Ian

AU - van der Straten, Ariane

AU - Shacklett, Barbara

AU - Dang, Que

AU - Swann, Edith M.

AU - Bolton, Diane L.

AU - Boily, Marie Claude

PY - 2018/11/1

Y1 - 2018/11/1

N2 - Quantifying HIV-1 transmission risk per-act of anal intercourse (AI) is important for HIV-1 prevention. We updated previous reviews by searching Medline and Embase to 02/2018. We derived pooled estimates of receptive AI (URAI) and insertive AI (UIAI) risk unprotected by condoms using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses were conducted by gender, study design, and whether antiretroviral treatment (ART) had been introduced by the time of the study. Two new relevant studies were identified, one of which met inclusion criteria, adding three new cohorts and increasing number of individuals/partnerships included from 1869 to 14 277. Four studies, all from high-income countries, were included. Pooled HIV-1 risk was higher for URAI (1.25%, 95% CI 0.55%-2.23%, N = 5, I2 = 87%) than UIAI (0.17%, 95 % CI 0.09%-0.26%, N = 3, I2 = 0%). The sole heterosexual URAI estimate (3.38%, 95% CI 1.85%-4.91%), from a study of 72 women published in a peer-reviewed journal, was significantly higher than the men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) pooled estimate (0.75%, 95% CI 0.56%-0.98%, N = 4, P < 0.0001) and higher than the only other heterosexual estimate identified (0.4%, 95% CI 0.08%-2.0%, based on 59 women, excluded for being a pre-2013 abstract). Pooled per-act URAI risk varied by study design (retrospective-partner studies: 2.56%, 95% CI 1.20%-4.42%, N = 2 (one MSM, one heterosexual); prospective studies: 0.71%, 95% CI 0.51%-0.93%, N = 3 MSM, P < 0.0001). URAI risk was lower for studies conducted in the ART era (0.75%, 95% CI 0.52%-1.03%) than pre-ART (1.67%, 95% CI 0.44%-3.67%) but not significantly so (P = 0.537). Prevention messages must emphasize that HIV-1 infectiousness through AI remains high, even in the ART era. Further studies, particularly among heterosexual populations and in resource-limited settings, are required to elucidate whether AI risk differs by gender, region and following population-level ART scale-up.

AB - Quantifying HIV-1 transmission risk per-act of anal intercourse (AI) is important for HIV-1 prevention. We updated previous reviews by searching Medline and Embase to 02/2018. We derived pooled estimates of receptive AI (URAI) and insertive AI (UIAI) risk unprotected by condoms using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses were conducted by gender, study design, and whether antiretroviral treatment (ART) had been introduced by the time of the study. Two new relevant studies were identified, one of which met inclusion criteria, adding three new cohorts and increasing number of individuals/partnerships included from 1869 to 14 277. Four studies, all from high-income countries, were included. Pooled HIV-1 risk was higher for URAI (1.25%, 95% CI 0.55%-2.23%, N = 5, I2 = 87%) than UIAI (0.17%, 95 % CI 0.09%-0.26%, N = 3, I2 = 0%). The sole heterosexual URAI estimate (3.38%, 95% CI 1.85%-4.91%), from a study of 72 women published in a peer-reviewed journal, was significantly higher than the men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) pooled estimate (0.75%, 95% CI 0.56%-0.98%, N = 4, P < 0.0001) and higher than the only other heterosexual estimate identified (0.4%, 95% CI 0.08%-2.0%, based on 59 women, excluded for being a pre-2013 abstract). Pooled per-act URAI risk varied by study design (retrospective-partner studies: 2.56%, 95% CI 1.20%-4.42%, N = 2 (one MSM, one heterosexual); prospective studies: 0.71%, 95% CI 0.51%-0.93%, N = 3 MSM, P < 0.0001). URAI risk was lower for studies conducted in the ART era (0.75%, 95% CI 0.52%-1.03%) than pre-ART (1.67%, 95% CI 0.44%-3.67%) but not significantly so (P = 0.537). Prevention messages must emphasize that HIV-1 infectiousness through AI remains high, even in the ART era. Further studies, particularly among heterosexual populations and in resource-limited settings, are required to elucidate whether AI risk differs by gender, region and following population-level ART scale-up.

KW - anal intercourse

KW - antiretroviral therapy

KW - heterosexual

KW - HIV

KW - infectivity

KW - meta-analysis

KW - MSM

KW - review

KW - transmission probability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052834365&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052834365&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/aji.13039

DO - 10.1111/aji.13039

M3 - Review article

C2 - 30175479

AN - SCOPUS:85052834365

VL - 80

JO - American Journal of Reproductive Immunology

JF - American Journal of Reproductive Immunology

SN - 8755-8920

IS - 5

M1 - e13039

ER -