Florence Momplaisir1, Mustafa Hussein, Danielle Tobin-Fiore, Laramie Smith, David Bennett, Carl Latkin, David S Metzger. 1. *Division of Infectious Diseases and HIV Medicine, Drexel College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA; †Public Health Policy and Administration, Joseph J. Zilber School of Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI; ‡Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; §Division of Public Health, UC San Diego School of Medicine, San Diego, CA; ‖Department of Psychiatry, Drexel, College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA; and ¶Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: HIV prevention interventions in the United States have failed to eliminate racial inequities. Here, we evaluate factors associated with racial inequities in HIV prevalence among people who inject drugs using HIV Prevention Trial Network 037 data. METHODS: We measured racial homophily (ie, all members share the same race), being in an HIV+ network (network with ≥1 HIV+ member), and drug and sex risk behaviors. A 2-level logistic regression with a random intercept evaluated the association between being in an HIV+ network and race adjusting for individual-level and network-level factors. RESULTS: Data from 232 index participants and 464 network members were included in the analysis. Racial homophily was high among blacks (79%) and whites (70%); 27% of all-black, 14% of all-white, and 23% of racially mixed networks included HIV+ members. Sex risk was similar across networks, but needle sharing was significantly lower in all-black (23%) compared with all-white (48%) and racially mixed (46%) networks. All-black [adjusted odds ratio (AOR), 3.6; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.4 to 9.5] and racially mixed (AOR, 2.0; 95% CI: 1.1 to 3.7) networks were more likely to include HIV+ network members; other factors associated with being in HIV+ network included homelessness (AOR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2 to 3.2), recent incarceration (AOR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2 to 0.7), and cocaine injection (AOR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.7). Risk behaviors were not associated with being in an HIV+ network. CONCLUSION: Despite having lower drug risk behavior, all-black networks disproportionately included HIV+ members. HIV prevention interventions for people who inject drugs need to go beyond individual risk and consider the composition of risk networks.
BACKGROUND: HIV prevention interventions in the United States have failed to eliminate racial inequities. Here, we evaluate factors associated with racial inequities in HIV prevalence among people who inject drugs using HIV Prevention Trial Network 037 data. METHODS: We measured racial homophily (ie, all members share the same race), being in an HIV+ network (network with ≥1 HIV+ member), and drug and sex risk behaviors. A 2-level logistic regression with a random intercept evaluated the association between being in an HIV+ network and race adjusting for individual-level and network-level factors. RESULTS: Data from 232 index participants and 464 network members were included in the analysis. Racial homophily was high among blacks (79%) and whites (70%); 27% of all-black, 14% of all-white, and 23% of racially mixed networks included HIV+ members. Sex risk was similar across networks, but needle sharing was significantly lower in all-black (23%) compared with all-white (48%) and racially mixed (46%) networks. All-black [adjusted odds ratio (AOR), 3.6; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.4 to 9.5] and racially mixed (AOR, 2.0; 95% CI: 1.1 to 3.7) networks were more likely to include HIV+ network members; other factors associated with being in HIV+ network included homelessness (AOR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2 to 3.2), recent incarceration (AOR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2 to 0.7), and cocaine injection (AOR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.7). Risk behaviors were not associated with being in an HIV+ network. CONCLUSION: Despite having lower drug risk behavior, all-black networks disproportionately included HIV+ members. HIV prevention interventions for people who inject drugs need to go beyond individual risk and consider the composition of risk networks.
Authors: Gregorio A Millett; John L Peterson; Stephen A Flores; Trevor A Hart; William L Jeffries; Patrick A Wilson; Sean B Rourke; Charles M Heilig; Jonathan Elford; Kevin A Fenton; Robert S Remis Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-07-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Don C Des Jarlais; Kamyar Arasteh; Courtney McKnight; Jonathan Feelemyer; Susan Tross; David Perlman; Samuel Friedman; Aimee Campbell Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Javier A Cepeda; Sunil S Solomon; Aylur K Srikrishnan; Allison M McFall; Muniratnam Suresh Kumar; Canjeevaram K Vasudevan; Santhanam Anand; David D Celentano; Gregory M Lucas; Shruti H Mehta Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Stephen W Hwang; Maritt J Kirst; Shirley Chiu; George Tolomiczenko; Alex Kiss; Laura Cowan; Wendy Levinson Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2009-07-23 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Sabriya L Linton; Hannah L F Cooper; Yen-Tyng Chen; Mohammed A Khan; Mary E Wolfe; Zev Ross; Don C Des Jarlais; Samuel R Friedman; Barbara Tempalski; Dita Broz; Salaam Semaan; Cyprian Wejnert; Gabriela Paz-Bailey Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Sabriya L Linton; Don C Des Jarlais; Joseph T Ornstein; Matt Kasman; Ross Hammond; Behzad Kianian; Justin C Smith; Mary E Wolfe; Zev Ross; Danielle German; Colin Flynn; Henry F Raymond; R Monina Klevens; Emma Spencer; John-Mark Schacht; Teresa Finlayson; Gabriela Paz-Bailey; Cyprian Wejnert; Hannah L F Cooper Journal: Int J Drug Policy Date: 2021-03-31