Uptake of PrEP and condom and sexual risk behavior among MSM during the ANRS IPERGAY trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The double-blind phase of the randomized ANRS IPERGAY trial, evaluating sexual activity-based oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), was conducted among high-risk men who have sex with men (MSM). Results showed an 86% (95% CI: 40-98) relative reduction in HIV incidence among participants with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-emtricitabine vs. placebo. The present pooled analysis aimed to analyze (i) participants' adherence to the prescribed treatment and/or condom use during sexual intercourse and (ii) sexual behavior during the double-blind phase of the study. Four hundred MSM were enrolled in the trial. Every 2 months they completed online questionnaires collecting sexual behavior and PrEP adherence data regarding their most recent sexual intercourse. A total of 2232 questionnaires (M0-M24) were analyzed. Changes over time were evaluated using a mixed model accounting for multiple measures. Irrespective of sexual partner and practice type, on average, 42.6% (min: 32.1-max: 45.8%) reported PrEP use only during their most recent episode of sexual intercourse; 29% (22.9-35.6%) reported both PrEP and condom use; 11.7% (7.2-18.9%) reported condom-use only, and 16.7% (10.8-29.6%) reported no PrEP or condom use with no significant change during the study. Scheduled (i.e., correct) PrEP use was reported on average by 59.0% (47.2-68.5%) of those reporting PrEP use during their most recent sexual intercourse. Overall, 70.3% (65.3-79.4%) and 69.3% (58.3-75.4%) of participants reported, respectively, condomless anal and condomless receptive anal intercourse during their most recent sexual encounter without significant change during follow-up. Overall, on average 83.3% (min: 70.4-max: 89.2%) of participants protected themselves by PrEP intake or condom use or both during the trial, and no increase in at-risk sexual practices was observed. None of these indicators showed significant trend during the follow-up, although we found a tendency toward decrease (p = .19) of the median number of sexual partners strengthening the absence of behavioral disinhibition. On-demand PrEP within a comprehensive HIV prevention package could improve prevention in MSM.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".