| Literature DB >> 24498067 |
Kenneth H Mayer1, Lei Wang2, Beryl Koblin3, Sharon Mannheimer4, Manya Magnus5, Carlos del Rio6, Susan Buchbinder7, Leo Wilton8, Vanessa Cummings9, Christopher C Watson5, Estelle Piwowar-Manning9, Charlotte Gaydos10, Susan H Eshleman9, William Clarke9, Ting-Yuan Liu2, Cherry Mao2, Samuel Griffith11, Darrell Wheeler12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: American Black men who have sex with men (MSM) are disproportionately affected by HIV, but the factors associated with this concentrated epidemic are not fully understood.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24498067 PMCID: PMC3909083 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087298
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1HIV serostatus of Black Men who have sex with men who enrolled in HPTN 061.
Sociodemographic characteristics of HPTN 061study participants by HIV status: Newly diagnosed versus previously diagnosed or HIV-uninfected.
| Variable | Total | Newly Diagnosed(N = 96) | PreviouslyDiagnosed(N = 252) | HIV Uninfected (N = 1167) | P value | P value |
|
| ||||||
|
| 33% | 33% | 12% | 38% | <0.001 | 0.386 |
|
| 40 | 37 | 43 | 38 | ||
|
| 27, 47 | 25, 44 | 38, 49 | 25, 47 | ||
|
| 8% | 8% | 6% | 8% | 0.424 | 0.899 |
|
| 96% | 99% | 96% | 95% | 0.295 | 0.119 |
|
| 55% | 65% | 54% | 54% | 0.064 | 0.049 |
|
| 20% | 14% | 19% | 21% | 0.227 | 0.076 |
|
| 31% | 21% | 17% | 35% | 0.300 | 0.011 |
|
| 10% | 6% | 6% | 11% | 0.917 | 0.175 |
|
| 0.661 | 0.269 | ||||
|
| 38% | 42% | 38% | 38% | ||
|
| 50% | 51% | 56% | 49% | ||
|
| 11% | 7% | 6% | 13% | ||
|
| 0.482 | 0.030 | ||||
|
| 44% | 52% | 49% | 43% | ||
|
| 32% | 34% | 32% | 32% | ||
|
| 24% | 14% | 19% | 25% | ||
|
| 0.978 | 0.732 | ||||
|
| 11% | 10% | 10% | 12% | ||
|
| 89% | 89% | 90% | 88% | ||
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | ||||
|
| 20% | 27% | 19% | 19% | ||
|
| 15% | 6% | 15% | 16% | ||
|
| 14% | 21% | 13% | 14% | ||
|
| 19% | 26% | 15% | 19% | ||
|
| 13% | 2% | 9% | 15% | ||
|
| 19% | 18% | 30% | 16% | ||
Newly diagnosed with HIV compared to previously diagnosed.
Newly diagnosed compared to HIV-uninfected.
p-value from Fisher’s exact test.
Sexual identity and behavior of HPTN 061study participants by HIV status: Newly diagnosed versus previously diagnosed or HIV-uninfected.
| Variable | TotalPrevalence | NewlyDiagnosed(N = 96) | PreviouslyDiagnosed(N = 252) | HIVUninfected(N = 1167) | P value | P value | |
|
| 0.261 | 0.004 | |||||
|
| 30% | 42% | 40% | 26% | |||
|
| 29% | 26% | 20% | 31% | |||
|
| 42% | 32% | 40% | 43% | |||
|
| 3% | 5% | 4% | 3% | 0.776 | 0.151 | |
|
| 0.198 | 0.316 | |||||
|
| 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | |||
|
| 3, 9 | 3, 9 | 2, 7 | 3, 10 | |||
|
| 82% | 85% | 76% | 83% | 0.060 | 0.515 | |
|
| 22% | 38% | 53% | 14% | 0.011 | <0.001 | |
|
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.0016‡ | 0.0256‡ | |
|
| 0–700 | 0–172 | 0–39 | 0–700 | |||
|
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.0013‡ | <0.001‡ | |
|
| 0–100 | 0–30 | 0–54 | 0–100 | |||
|
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |||
|
| 0–202 | 0–91 | 0–55 | 0–202 | 0.0044‡ | <0.001‡ | |
|
| 51% | 69% | 61% | 47% | 0.144 | <.001 | |
|
| 75% | 72% | 69% | 76% | 0.605 | 0.435 | |
|
| 44% | 32% | 28% | 49% | 0.407 | 0.002 | |
|
| 25% | 17% | 13% | 28% | 0.319 | 0.018 | |
|
| 22% | 17% | 20% | 23% | 0.550 | 0.173 | |
|
| 10% | 10% | 13% | 10% | 0.440 | 0.884 | |
Newly diagnosed with HIV compared to previously diagnosed.
Newly diagnosed compared to HIV-uninfected.
P-value from Fisher’s exact test.
Sexually transmitted infections among Black men who have sex with men (participants in HPTN 061) by HIV status: Newly diagnosed versus previously diagnosed or HIV-uninfected at baseline (N = 1553).
| Variable | TotalPrevalence | Newly HIV Diagnosed (N = 96) | Previously HIV Diagnosed (N = 252) | HIV Uninfected(N = 1167) | P value | P value |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | ||||
|
| 3% | 11% | 4% | 2% | ||
|
| 4% | 5% | 12% | 3% | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| 1% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0.199 | 0.116 |
|
| 3% | 8% | 4% | 3% | 0.011 | 0.004 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 2% | 4% | 2% | 2% | 0.106 | 0.025 |
|
| 6% | 15% | 6% | 6% | 0.020 | <0.001 |
|
| 3% | 11% | 3% | 2% | 0.010 | <0.001 |
|
| 16% | 31% | 25% | 14% | 0.209 | <0.001 |
Newly diagnosed with HIV compared to previously diagnosed.
Newly diagnosed compared to HIV-uninfected.
Social and behavioral issues among Black men who have sex with men (participants in HPTN 061) by HIV status: Newly diagnosed versus previously diagnosed or HIV-uninfected at baseline (N = 1553).
| Variable | Total Prevalence | NewlyDiagnosed(N = 96) | Previously Diagnosed (N = 252) | HIV Uninfected (N = 1167) | P value | P value |
|
| ||||||
|
| 5% | 5% | 4% | 5% | 0.206 | 0.187 |
|
| 6% | 3% | 3% | 6% | 0.271 | 0.253 |
|
| 12% | 13% | 20% | 10% | 0.134 | 0.384 |
|
| 38% | 37% | 41% | 38% | 0.573 | 0.878 |
|
| 56% | 54% | 53% | 57% | 0.861 | 0.642 |
|
| 47% | 39% | 42% | 48% | 0.658 | 0.093 |
|
| 0.575 | 0.356 | ||||
|
| 57% | 62% | 68% | 54% | ||
|
| 35% | 30% | 27% | 37% | ||
|
| 8% | 8% | 5% | 9% | ||
|
| 45% | 44% | 49% | 44% | 0.472 | 0.929 |
|
| 44% | 43% | 54% | 43% | 0.083 | 0.921 |
|
| 76% | 70% | 81% | 76% | 0.030 | 0.212 |
Newly diagnosed with HIV compared to previously diagnosed.
Newly diagnosed compared to HIV-uninfected.
Univariate and multivariate logistic regression on modeling the probability of Black men who have sex with men being newly diagnosed HIV infection (NHIV) versus previously diagnosed HIV infection (PHIV) at time of enrollment.
| Univariate Logistic Regression | Multivariate Logistic Regression | |||||
| Characteristics | OddsRatio | 95% CI | P-value | OddsRatio | 95% CI | P-value |
| Age 18–30 vs. 30+ | 3.7 | (2.1, 6.5) | <.001 | 2.9 | (1.5, 5.6) | 0.001 |
| Education less than college vs. college or higher | 1.6 | (1.0, 2.6) | 0.065 | 1.7 | (1.0, 3.0) | 0.057 |
| Number of male partners 2+ vs. <2 | 1.8 | (1.0, 3.5) | 0.063 | 1.9 | (0.9, 4.1) | 0.084 |
| Having HIV+male partners Any vs. none | 0.5 | (0.3, 0.9) | 0.012 | 0.5 | (0.3, 0.9) | 0.026 |
| Multiple STI Yes vs. no | 4.0 | (1.5, 10.1) | 0.004 | 2.3 | (0.8, 6.9) | 0.146 |
| Member of a church or religious/spiritual institutioncurrently No vs. yes | 1.5 | (0.9, 2.5) | 0.084 | 1.2 | (0.7, 2.0) | 0.590 |
| Member of religious/spiritual organization while growingup No vs. yes | 1.8 | (1.1, 3.1) | 0.032 | 1.7 | (0.9, 3.1) | 0.118 |
Multivariate regression model adjusted for city.
Univariate and multivariate logistic regression on modeling the probability of Black men who have sex with men being newly diagnosed HIV infection (NHIV) versus HIV-uninfected at time of enrollment.
| Prevalence | Univariate Logistic Regression | Multivariate Logistic Regression | ||||
| Effect | OddsRatio | 95% CI | ORP-value | OddsRatio | 95% CI | ORP-value |
| Education Less than college vs. college or higher | 1.5 | (1.0, 2.4) | 0.051 | 1.5 | (0.9, 2.4) | 0.125 |
| Student status No vs. yes | 1.7 | (0.9, 3.1) | 0.079 | 1.8 | (0.9, 3.4) | 0.076 |
| Employment Not working vs. working | 1.9 | (1.1, 3.1) | 0.012 | 2.6 | (1.4, 4.6) | 0.002 |
| Insufficient Income Once in a while vs. never | 0.9 | (0.6, 1.4) | 0.612 | 0.9 | (0.5, 1.5) | 0.710 |
| Fairly often/very often vs. never | 0.4 | (0.2, 0.8) | 0.010 | 0.4 | (0.2, 0.9) | 0.019 |
| STI Any vs. none | 2.9 | (1.8, 4.6) | <.001 | 2.3 | (1.4, 4.0) | 0.002 |
| Sexual Identity Selected Exclusively homosexual/gay vs. other | 2.2 | (1.3, 3.6) | 0.002 | 1.4 | (0.8, 2.5) | 0.202 |
| Exclusively bisexual vs. other | 1.2 | (0.7, 2.0) | 0.560 | 1.6 | (0.8, 3.0) | 0.149 |
| Having HIV+male partner Any vs. none | 3.7 | (2.3, 5.7) | <.001 | 3.8 | (2.3, 6.3) | <.001 |
| URAI Yes vs. no | 2.6 | (1.6, 4.1) | <.001 | 2.3 | (1.4, 3.8) | 0.002 |
| Any female partner Yes vs. no | 0.5 | (0.3, 0.8) | 0.002 | 0.7 | (0.4, 1.4) | 0.361 |
| Any transgender partner Yes vs. no | 0.5 | (0.3, 0.9) | 0.018 | 0.6 | (0.3, 1.2) | 0.151 |
| Buzzed or drunk on alcohol with sex Yes vs. No | 0.7 | (0.5, 1.1) | 0.094 | 0.8 | (0.5, 1.4) | 0.479 |
Multivariate regression model adjusted for city.