Among these young MSM, HIV prevalence was high, underscoring the need to evaluate and intensify prevention efforts for young MSM, particularly blacks, men of mixed race or ethnicity, Hispanics, and adolescents. JAMA. 2000;284:198-204

This study evaluated the magnitude and distribution of unrecognized HIV infection among young men who have sex with men (MSM) and of those with unrecognized infection, the prevalence and correlates of unprotected anal intercourse (UAI), perceived low risk for infection, and delayed HIV testing. MSM aged 15-29 years were approached, interviewed, counseled, and tested for HIV at 263 randomly sampled venues in 6 US cities from 1994-2000. Of 5649 MSM participants, 573 (10%) tested positive for HIV. Of these, 91% of black, 69% of Hispanic, and 60% of white MSM (77% overall) were unaware of their infection. The 439 MSM with unrecognized infection reported a total of 2253 male sex partners in the previous 6 months; 51% had UAI; 59% perceived that they were at low risk for being infected; and 55% had not tested in the previous year. The HIV epidemic among MSM in the United States continues unabated, in part, because many young HIV-infected MSM are unaware of their infection and unknowingly expose their partners to HIV. To advance HIV prevention in the third decade of HIV/AIDS, prevention programs must reduce unrecognized infection among young MSM by increasing the demand for and availability of HIV testing services.

Effective drug prevention and treatment programs addressing local drug-use patterns and associated factors are urgently needed for young MSM, a population with a high rate of illicit drug use.

Using data from a multisite venue-based survey of male subjects aged 15 to 22 years, we examined racial/ethnic differences in demographics, partner type, partner type-specific condom use, drug use, and HIV prevalence in 3316 US black, multiethnic black, Latino, and white men who have sex with men (MSM). We further estimated associations of these factors with HIV infection and their influence on racial/ethnic disparities in HIV prevalence. HIV prevalences were 16% for both black and multiethnic black participants, 6.9% for Latinos, and 3.3% for whites. Paradoxically, potentially risky sex and drug-using behaviors were generally reported most frequently by whites and least frequently by blacks. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, positive associations with HIV included older age, being out of school or work, sex while on crack cocaine, and anal sex with another male regardless of reported condom use level. Differences in these factors did not explain the racial/ethnic disparities in HIV prevalence, with both groups of blacks experiencing more than 9 times and Latinos experiencing approximately twice the fully adjusted odds of infection compared with whites. Understanding racial/ethnic disparities in HIV risk requires information beyond the traditional risk behavior and partnership type distinctions. Prevention programs should address risks in steady partnerships, target young men before sexual initiation with male partners, and tailor interventions to men of color and of lower socioeconomic status.

The authors utilized a cohort study among Seattle injection drug users (IDUs) to assess whether participation in a syringe exchange program was associated with incidence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Susceptible IDU subjects (187 seronegative for antibody to HCV, and 460 seronegative for core antibody to HBV) were identified in drug treatment, corrections, and social service agencies from June 1994 to January 1996, and followed for seroconversion one year later. The subjects included in the analysis were Seattle-King County (Washington State) area IDUs enrolled in a larger multipurpose cohort study, the Risk Activity Variables, Epidemiology, and Network Study (RAVEN Study). There were 39 HCV infections (20.9/100/year) and 46 HBV infections (10.0/100/year). There was no apparent protective effect of syringe exchange against HBV (former exchange users, relative risk (RR) = 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.2-2.5; sporadic exchange users, RR = 2.4, 95% CI 0.9-6.5; regular users, RR = 1.81, 95% CI 0.7-4.8; vs. RR = 1.0 for nonusers of the exchange; adjusted for daily drug injection). Neither did the exchange protect against HCV infection (sporadic users, RR = 2.6, 95% CI 0.8-8.5; regular users, RR = 1.3, 95% CI 0.8-2.2; vs. RR = 1.0 for nonusers; adjusted for recent onset of injection and syringe sharing prior to enrollment). While it is possible that uncontrolled confounding or other bias obscured a true beneficial impact of exchange use, these data suggest that no such benefit occurred during the period of the study.