BackgroundSymptom- and sexual history-based testing i.e., testing on indication, for anorectal sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in women is common. Yet, it is unknown whether this strategy is effective. Moreover, little is known about alternative transmission routes i.e. by fingers/toys. This study assesses anorectal STI prevalence and infections missed by current testing practice, thereby informing the optimal control strategy for anorectal STIs in women.MethodsWomen (n = 663) attending our STI-clinic between May 2012-July 2013 were offered routine testing for anorectal and urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Data were collected on demographics, sexual behaviour and symptoms. Women were assigned to one of the categories: indication (reported anal sex/symptoms), fingers/toys (only reported use of fingers/toys), or without indication.ResultsOf women, 92% (n = 654) participated. There were 203 reports (31.0%) of anal sex and/or symptoms (indication), 48 reports (7.3%) of only using fingers/toys (fingers/toys), and 403 reports (61.6%) of no anal symptoms, no anal sex and no anal use of fingers/toys (without indication). The overall prevalence was 11.2% (73/654) for urogenital chlamydia and 8.4% (55/654) for anorectal chlamydia. Gonorrhoea infections were not observed. Prevalence of anorectal chlamydia was 7.9% (16/203) for women with indication and 8.6% (39/451) for all other women (P = 0.74). Two-thirds (39/55) of anorectal infections were diagnosed in women without indication. Isolated anorectal chlamydia was rare (n = 3): of all women with an anorectal infection, 94.5% (52/55) also had co-occurrence of urogenital chlamydia. Of all women with urogenital chlamydia, 71.2% (52/73) also had anorectal chlamydia.ConclusionsCurrent selective testing on indication of symptoms and sexual history is not an appropriate control strategy for anorectal chlamydia in women visiting an STI clinic. Routine universal anorectal testing is feasible and may be a possible control strategy in women. Yet costs may be a problem. When more restricted control measures are preferred, possible alternatives include (1) anorectal testing only in women with urogenital chlamydia (problem: treatment delay or loss to follow up), and (2) direct treatment for urogenital chlamydia that is effective for anorectal chlamydia as well.

BackgroundAnorectal and pharyngeal infections with Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrheae (NG) are commonly observed in men who have sex with men (MSM). There is increasing evidence that such infections at extra-genital sites are also common in women. In both sexes, these infections are largely overlooked as they are not routinely tested for in regular care. Testing based on sexual behavior or symptoms would only detect half of these extra-genital infections. This paper elucidates the differences and similarities between women and MSM, regarding the epidemiology of extra-genital CT and NG. It discusses the clinical and public health impact of untested extra-genital infections, how this may impact management strategies, and thereby identifies key research areas.DiscussionExtra-genital CT is as common in women as it is in MSM; NG in women is as common at their extra-genital sites as it is at their genital sites. The substantial numbers of extra-genital CT and NG being missed in women and MSM indicate a need to test and treat more patients and perhaps different choices in treatment and partner management strategies. Doing so will likely contribute to reduced morbidity and transmission in both sexes. However, in our opinion, it is clear that there are several knowledge gaps in understanding the clinical and public health impact of extra-genital CT and NG. Key research areas that need to be addressed concern associated morbidity (anorectal and reproductive morbidity due to extra-genital infections), ‘the best’ management strategies, including testing and treatment for extra-genital CT, extra-genital treatment resistance, transmission probabilities between partners and between anatomic sites in a woman, and impact on transmission of other infections. Data are also lacking on cost-effectiveness of pharyngeal testing, and of NG testing and anorectal CT testing in women. Gaps in the management of extra-genital CT and NG may also apply for other STIs, such Mycoplasma genitalium.SummaryCurrent management strategies, including testing, to address extra-genital CT and NG in both sexes are suboptimal. Comparative data on several identified key themes in women and MSM are lacking and urgently needed to guide better management of extra-genital infections.

Universal testing of STD clinic clients who were MSM and swingers yielded more than half of all anorectal STD infections and is more sensitive for identifying anorectal STD infections compared with selective testing. Universal testing may be a more effective strategy for interrupting the ongoing transmission in high-risk sexual networks.

Background The intentional use of drugs to have sex–chemsex–among men who have sex with men (MSM) might contribute to the high sexually transmitted infections (STI) prevalence in this group. Limited data is available on chemsex outside major cities. The current study investigated the use of a wide variety of drugs during sex among MSM living outside major cities in the Netherlands and their associations with STI. Methods In 2018, 350 MSM were recruited at STI clinics and 250 MSM completed an online questionnaire. Questionnaire data were linked to clients’ most recent STI laboratory test results. Chemsex was defined as using cocaine, crystal meth, designer drugs, GHB/GBL, ketamine, speed, or XTC/MDMA during sex in the preceding six months. The use of other drugs was also assessed. Determinants (chemsex, specific drugs, number of drugs, combining, and frequency) potentially associated with STI were assessed using multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and sexual history. Results Chemsex was reported by 35% (95%CI: 29–41) of the 250 participants. XTC/MDMA (27%; 68/250) and GHB/GBL (26%; 64/250) were the most used drugs. STI positivity was 33% (29/87) in MSM engaging in chemsex and 12% (12/163) in MSM not engaging in chemsex (p<0.001). Half of MSM engaging in chemsex (45/87) used three of more different chemsex drugs; STI positivity in this group was 44% (20/45). The only factor independently associated with STI was the use of three or more chemsex drugs (aOR: 4.13, 95%CI: 1.77–9.62). Conclusion This study shows that chemsex is prevalent among MSM visiting the STI clinic outside major cities in the Netherlands, suggesting that health services in both urban and non-urban areas should be aware of and informed on chemsex. MSM who used multiple drugs are at particular risk for STI, indicating a special need for STI prevention and care in this group.

Anorectal screening in women without an indication is feasible and highly acceptable. Selective testing on indication could be an appropriate control strategy for anorectal gonorrhea, as few infections would be missed. In contrast, selective testing is a suboptimal control strategy for anorectal chlamydia, as we found a high prevalence in women both with and without indication for anorectal testing, along with a substantial amount of anorectal-only infections.

Testing only for non-urogenital infections is insufficient, as it overlooks many infections. The use of coincidental treatment is therefore a suboptimal control strategy in high-risk groups for halting complications and transmission. There is an urgent need to optimise the testing guidelines for chlamydia and gonorrhoea at different anatomical sites.

ObjectivesFemale anorectal Chlamydia trachomatis (chlamydia) infections are common irrespective of recent anal sex. We explored the role of anorectal infections in chlamydia transmission and estimated the impact of interventions aimed at improved detection and treatment of anorectal infections.MethodsWe developed a pair compartmental model of heterosexuals aged 15–29 years attending STI clinics, in which women can be susceptible to or infected with chlamydia urogenitally and/or anorectally and men urogenitally. Transmission probabilities per vaginal and anal sex act, together with an autoinoculation probability, were estimated by fitting to anatomic site-specific prevalence data (14% urogenital; 11% anorectal prevalence). We investigated the 10-year reduction in female chlamydia prevalence of interventions (universal anorectal testing of female STI clinic attendees or doxycycline use for urogenital chlamydia) relative to continued current care (anorectal testing on indication and doxycycline for anorectal and azithromycin for urogenital chlamydia).ResultsThe transmission probability per anal sex act was 5.8% (IQR 3.0–8.3%), per vaginal sex act 2.0% (IQR 1.7–2.2%) and the daily autoinoculation probability was 0.7% (IQR 0.5–1.0%). More anorectal chlamydia infections were caused by autoinoculation than by recent anal sex. Universal anorectal testing reduced population prevalence modestly with 8.7% (IQR 7.6–9.7%), yet the reduction was double that of doxycycline use for urogenital infections (4.3% (IQR 3.5–5.3%)) relative to continued current care.ConclusionsAutoinoculation between anatomic sites in women might play a role in sustaining high chlamydia prevalence. A shift to more anorectal testing of female STI clinic attendees may be considered for its (albeit modest) impact on reducing prevalence.

ObjectiveChlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) infections can clear without treatment. Despite high prevalence of anorectal infections in men who have sex with men (MSM) and women, studies on anorectal clearance are scarce. Moreover it is unknown whether bacterial load affects urogenital/anorectal CT clearance. In this prospective cohort study, CT and NG clearance is assessed at three anatomical sites of men and women.MethodsCT-positive and NG-positive MSM, heterosexual men and women ≥18 years of age visiting our STI clinic between 2011 and 2013 underwent a repeat test when returning for treatment (n=482). The primary outcome was clearance, defined as a positive nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) at screening-consultation, followed by a negative NAAT at treatment-consultation. Sociodemographics, sexual risk behaviour and CT bacterial load (inhouse quantitative PCR) were tested as determinants for clearance using multivariable logistic regression for CT and Fisher’s exact test for NG.ResultsCT clearance was 9.1% (10/110) for urine, 6.8% (20/292) for vaginal swabs, 12.7% (8/63) for anorectal swabs (ie, 4.0% [1/25] in MSM and 18.4% [7/38] in women) and 57.1% (4/7) for oropharyngeal swabs. For NG this was 33.3% (2/6), 28.6% (2/7), 20.0% (2/10) and 27.3% (6/22), respectively. The number of days between tests (median 10, IQR 7–14) was not associated with clearance. Lower bacterial load at screening was the only predictor for CT clearance (urine mean 1.2 vs 2.6 log CT/mL, p=0.001; vaginal swabs mean 2.1 vs 5.2 log CT/mL p<0.0001; anorectal swabs mean 2.0 vs 3.7 log CT/mL, p=0.002). None of the tested determinants were associated with NG clearance.ConclusionsThis study reports the largest number of anorectal infections tested for CT and NG clearance to date. Clearance in all sample types was substantial: between 7% and 57% for CT, and between 20% and 33% for NG (notwithstanding low absolute numbers). CT clearance was associated with a lower load at screening. However, not all individuals with low bacterial CT load cleared the infection, hampering STI guideline change.