| Literature DB >> 24727187 |
K M Mitchell1, A M Foss2, H J Prudden3, Z Mukandavire4, M Pickles5, J R Williams6, H C Johnson7, B M Ramesh8, R Washington9, S Isac10, S Rajaram11, A E Phillips12, J Bradley13, M Alary14, S Moses15, C M Lowndes16, C H Watts17, M-C Boily18, P Vickerman19.
Abstract
In India, the identity of men who have sex with men (MSM) is closely related to the role taken in anal sex (insertive, receptive or both), but little is known about sexual mixing between identity groups. Both role segregation (taking only the insertive or receptive role) and the extent of assortative (within-group) mixing are known to affect HIV epidemic size in other settings and populations. This study explores how different possible mixing scenarios, consistent with behavioural data collected in Bangalore, south India, affect both the HIV epidemic, and the impact of a targeted intervention. Deterministic models describing HIV transmission between three MSM identity groups (mostly insertive Panthis/Bisexuals, mostly receptive Kothis/Hijras and versatile Double Deckers), were parameterised with behavioural data from Bangalore. We extended previous models of MSM role segregation to allow each of the identity groups to have both insertive and receptive acts, in differing ratios, in line with field data. The models were used to explore four different mixing scenarios ranging from assortative (maximising within-group mixing) to disassortative (minimising within-group mixing). A simple model was used to obtain insights into the relationship between the degree of within-group mixing, R0 and equilibrium HIV prevalence under different mixing scenarios. A more complex, extended version of the model was used to compare the predicted HIV prevalence trends and impact of an HIV intervention when fitted to data from Bangalore. With the simple model, mixing scenarios with increased amounts of assortative (within-group) mixing tended to give rise to a higher R0 and increased the likelihood that an epidemic would occur. When the complex model was fit to HIV prevalence data, large differences in the level of assortative mixing were seen between the fits identified using different mixing scenarios, but little difference was projected in future HIV prevalence trends. An oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) intervention was modelled, targeted at the different identity groups. For intervention strategies targeting the receptive or receptive and versatile MSM together, the overall impact was very similar for different mixing patterns. However, for PrEP scenarios targeting insertive or versatile MSM alone, the overall impact varied considerably for different mixing scenarios; more impact was achieved with greater levels of disassortative mixing.Entities:
Keywords: Disassortative mixing; Mathematical model; Mixing matrix; Pre-exposure prophylaxis; Sexually transmitted infection
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24727187 PMCID: PMC4064301 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2014.04.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Theor Biol ISSN: 0022-5193 Impact factor: 2.691
Fig. 1for the different mixing scenarios. for each scenario is plotted against each other scenario in turn. Note that only one form of disassortative mixing is shown—giving priority to the PB and DD groups. The diagonal line shows equivalence.
Fig. 2(a) Overall mixing () and (b) degree of mixing within groups, for fits found using different mixing scenarios. and degree of mixing within groups are shown at their 2006 values. The heavy line in the middle of each box indicates the median, the limits of the box the 25th and 75th percentiles, and the whiskers the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles. Mixing scenarios presented in decreasing order of assortativeness. Number of fits: assortative 105, setting plausible 171, proportionate 305, disassortative 550.
Fig. 3HIV prevalence in (a) 2006 and (b) 2020, for different groups for fits found using different mixing scenarios. The heavy line in the middle of each box indicates the median, the limits of the box the 25th and 75th percentiles, and the whiskers the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles. Mixing scenarios presented in decreasing order of assortativeness. Number of fits: assortative 105, setting plausible 171, proportionate 305, disassortative 550. The fitting bounds for HIV prevalence in 2006 are shown (horizontal lines). Note the different y-axis scales for (a) and (b).
Fig. 4Percentage of infections averted during a 15-year PrEP intervention with 42% effectiveness and 60% coverage of the KH and DD groups (no treatment of PB group), for different mixing scenarios. The heavy line in the middle of each box indicates the median, the limits of the box the 25th and 75th percentiles, and the whiskers the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles. Mixing scenarios presented in decreasing order of assortativeness. Number of fits: assortative 105, setting plausible 171, proportionate 305, disassortative 550.
Median percentage of infections averted in whole MSM population for different PrEP intervention strategies. Eff.=effectiveness (efficacy×adherence). Text in bold highlights where the absolute difference in impact between the mixing scenarios is 10% or more or where the relative difference in impact ((max–min)/min) is 20% or greater.
| KH | 42 | 30 | 6.7 | 7.2 | 6.4 | 6.3 | 0.9 | 14.9 |
| KH | 42 | 60 | 13.3 | 14.3 | 12.8 | 12.5 | 1.8 | 14.6 |
| KH | 92 | 90 | 38.9 | 44.0 | 40.4 | 39.5 | 5.1 | 13.0 |
| DD | 42 | 30 | 6.6 | 6.1 | 7.4 | 7.0 | 1.3 | |
| DD | 42 | 60 | 12.5 | 11.4 | 14.5 | 13.9 | 3.0 | |
| DD | 92 | 90 | 31.4 | 28.3 | 42.2 | 43.1 | ||
| KH+DD | 42 | 30 | 14.3 | 13.0 | 14.1 | 13.2 | 1.2 | 9.5 |
| KH+DD | 42 | 60 | 27.5 | 25.4 | 27.1 | 25.8 | 2.1 | 8.5 |
| KH+DD | 92 | 90 | 73.3 | 70.6 | 73.6 | 73.5 | 2.9 | 4.2 |
| PB | 42 | 30 | 9.6 | 11.4 | 10.1 | 11.5 | 1.8 | 19.1 |
| PB | 42 | 60 | 18.4 | 21.9 | 19.5 | 22.4 | 4.0 | |
| PB | 92 | 90 | 50.7 | 58.6 | 54.4 | 63.9 | ||
| KH+DD+PB | 42 | 30 | 22.9 | 22.9 | 23.0 | 23.0 | 0.1 | 0.6 |
| KH+DD+PB | 42 | 60 | 41.9 | 41.8 | 42.0 | 41.8 | 0.2 | 0.5 |
| KH+DD+PB | 92 | 90 | 92.2 | 92.3 | 92.3 | 92.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
Fig. 5Percentage of infections averted during a 15-year PrEP intervention with 92% effectiveness and 90% coverage of DD group alone (no treatment of KH or PB groups), for different mixing scenarios. The heavy line in the middle of each box indicates the median, the limits of the box the 25th and 75th percentiles, and the whiskers the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles. Mixing scenarios presented in decreasing order of assortativeness. Number of fits: assortative 105, setting plausible 171, proportionate 305, disassortative 550.