HIV transmission risk through anal intercourse: systematic review, meta-analysis and implications for HIV prevention
By R. Baggaley, R. White, M. Boily. International Journal of Epidemiology, 2010
754 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Background The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infectiousness of anal intercourse (AI) has not been systematically reviewed, despite its role driving HIV epidemics among men who have sex with men (MSM) and its potential contribution to heterosexual spread. We assessed the per-act and per-partner HIV transmission risk from AI exposure for heterosexuals and MSM and its implications for HIV prevention. Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on HIV-1 infectiousness through AI was conducted. PubMed was searched to September 2008. A binomial model explored the individual risk of HIV infection with and without highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Results A total of 62 643 titles were searched; four publications reporting per-act and 12 reporting per-partner transmission estimates were included. Overall, random effects model summary estimates were 1.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.2–2.5)] and 40.4% (95% CI 6.0–74.9) for per-act and per-partner unprotected receptive AI (URAI), respectively. There was no significant difference between per-act risks of URAI for heterosexuals and MSM. Per-partner unprotected insertive AI (UIAI) and combined URAI–UIAI risk were 21.7% (95% CI 0.2–43.3) and 39.9% (95% CI 22.5–57.4), respectively, with no available per-act estimates. Per-partner combined URAI–UIAI summary estimates, which adjusted for additional exposures other than AI with a ‘main’ partner [7.9% (95% CI 1.2–14.5)], were lower than crude (unadjusted) estimates [48.1% (95% CI 35.3–60.8)]. Our modelling demonstrated that it would require unreasonably low numbers of AI HIV exposures per partnership to reconcile the summary per-act and per-partner estimates, suggesting considerable variability in AI infectiousness between and within partnerships over time. AI may substantially increase HIV transmission risk even if the infected partner is receiving HAART; however, predictions are highly sensitive to infectiousness assumptions based on viral load. Conclusions Unprotected AI is a high-risk practice for HIV transmission, probably with substantial variation in infectiousness. The significant heterogeneity between infectiousness estimates means that pooled AI HIV transmission probabilities should be used with caution. Recent reported rises in AI among heterosexuals suggest a greater understanding of the role AI plays in heterosexual sex lives may be increasingly important for HIV prevention.
Subfields: General Health Professions, Infectious Diseases, Microbiology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fe69d903d8aa6f06be2043dfdced54d74b383a31
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- P. Patel
- J. Brooks
- A. Lansky
- J. Mermin
- Arielle Lasry
- C. Borkowf
- Robert M. Kunst
- J. Usaola
Citations in the corpus
- Estimating per-act HIV transmission risk: a systematic review (2014, methodology): “First, we established what was already known, starting with a series of recent systematic reviews and metaanalyses that were identified through a comprehensive literature review conducted for a related project that also examined per-act HIV transmission risk and provided estimates of pooled per-act ”
- Sexual Activity Without Condoms and Risk of HIV Transmission in Serodifferent Couples When the HIV-Positive Partner Is Using Suppressive Antiretroviral Therapy. (2016, neutral): “Not specified 12 (5) 1 (<1) 32 (10) 8 (3) 15 (6) 52 (16) <.”