RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Anal Intercourse, HIV-1 Risk, and Efficacy in a Trial of a Dapivirine Vaginal Ring for HIV-1 Prevention
Peebles, K., van der Straten, A., Palanee-Phillips, T., Reddy, K., Hillier, S. L., Hendrix, C. W., Harkoo, I., Mirembe, B. G., Jeenarain, N., Baeten, J. M., & Brown, E. R. (2020). Brief Report: Anal Intercourse, HIV-1 Risk, and Efficacy in a Trial of a Dapivirine Vaginal Ring for HIV-1 Prevention. Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999), 83(3), 197-201. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0000000000002253
Objectives: To describe receptive anal intercourse (RAI) behaviors and correlates in a cohort of sub-Saharan African women, evaluate the association of RAI with HIV-1 risk, and evaluate whether the HIV-1 prevention efficacy of a dapivirine vaginal ring differs among women who reported RAI. Design: Secondary analysis of the MTN-020/ASPIRE trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating a dapivirine vaginal ring for HIV-1 prevention. Methods: At enrollment and month 3, women reported RAI in the prior 3 months in audio computer-assisted self-interviews. We evaluated associations between RAI and participant characteristics with chi(2) and t-tests adjusted for study site. Cox proportional hazards models stratified by study site tested the association of RAI with HIV-1 acquisition and effect modification by RAI. Results: Eighteen percent of women reported any RAI at enrollment and/or month 3, with a median of 2 (interquartile range: 1-4) RAI acts in the prior 3 months, accounting for 1.5% of total sex acts. RAI prevalence was higher among women with lower educational attainment and those reporting transactional sex. In adjusted models, RAI was not associated with HIV-1 acquisition (aHR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.54). The ring reduced HIV-1 risk by 27% (95% CI: -5 to 49) among women reporting no RAI and by 18% (95% CI: -57 to 57) among women reporting any RAI (interaction P-value = 0.77). Conclusions: RAI was modestly infrequent and was not associated with reduced HIV-1 protection from the ring, suggesting that, in populations with rates of RAI similar to this cohort, RAI may not appreciably reduce the population-level impact of the dapivirine vaginal ring.