ObjectiveDetermine the acceptability and epidemiological impact of increases in HIV testing in gay men in New South Wales (NSW), Australia– particularly pertinent when considering treatment as prevention and the need to reduce undiagnosed infections.MethodsWe conducted an online survey and focus groups to assess whether increases in HIV testing would be acceptable to gay men in NSW. In parallel, we assessed the potential impact of increases in testing coverage and/or frequency using an individual-based model of HIV transmission.ResultsIf sexual practices and the rate of initiating HIV treatment are unchanged then increasing HIV testing reduces infections. Increasing testing frequency has the largest impact, with a 13.8% reduction in HIV infections over 10 years if the ∼55–75% of men who test at least once per year increased their testing frequency to four times per year. If testing levels decrease from current levels then we expect an increase in HIV infections with a sharply rising trend over time. Increasing HIV testing would be acceptable if testing was more convenient. However, only ∼25% of men surveyed were ‘very likely’ to increase their level of HIV testing. Men delayed or avoided testing due to the slowness in obtaining results and if they believed they had not put themselves at risk.ConclusionsAn increase in HIV testing alone is unlikely to reduce HIV incidence substantially in NSW gay men– however, the relatively high testing levels need to continue to prevent an increase in HIV infections. In jurisdictions with lower levels of HIV testing, increases in testing coverage and frequency are likely to have a larger impact. Successful treatment as prevention interventions will require increases in testing rates; such increases would be acceptable to gay men in NSW but only if more convenient testing and rapid communication of results were available.

Chemoprophylaxis offers promise as an acceptable and effective intervention for mitigating syphilis epidemics. The outcomes of a planned placebo-controlled syphilis chemoprophylaxis trial are eagerly anticipated.

HIV optimism remains a useful indicator of gay men's likelihood to take risk, but technical knowledge, experience, desire, and attitudes to risk may all affect how people respond and often in multiple, sometimes contradictory, directions. Men's beliefs about HIV transmission risk in particular may reflect willingness to pursue pleasure over risk, or, alternatively, morbid fear of any risk. Measures of HIV optimism should be complemented by analysis of the complexities of individuals' assessments of both risk and pleasure in specific sexual contexts.

Among 746 participants in the Three or More Study (TOMS) of gay men who engaged in group sex in the previous 6 months, 22.4% reported unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with any partners they did not know to be the same HIV serostatus as themselves. Not knowing oneself to be HIV-negative, not having a clear intention to use condoms, and more frequent group sex were independently associated with UAI. This study shows that gay men who engage in group sex represent an important priority for targeted HIV prevention activities and research.

Estimates of the proportion of HIV infections coming from within regular sexual relationships among gay and bisexual men (GBM) vary widely. Research surveys use various partner type categories, but there is little understanding of how men classify their partners. We conducted an online cross-sectional survey of Australian GBM exploring sexual relationships, including 2057 men reporting on 2566 regular partnerships. Just over half of the partnerships were considered 'relationships', while the remainder were non-romantic 'fuckbuddy'-style arrangements. In multivariable analysis, factors associated with considering the partnership a 'relationship' were: using a 'romantic' descriptor, partnership length, monogamous agreements, any condomless anal sex with each other, love, and commitment. The category of 'regular partner' can mask diverse partnership types, which have different meanings to GBM, associated behaviours, and HIV risks. Certain HIV prevention techniques may be more suited to particular types of partnerships. 'Fuckbuddy' arrangements need to be more explicitly acknowledged in HIV prevention.

Gay and bisexual men (GBM) who participate in gay community subcultures have different profiles, including differing risk behaviors. We examined men's participation in gay community subcultures, and its association with risk behavior. In a cross-sectional survey, 849 GBM provided information about men in their personal networks. We devised measures of their participation in five subcultural groupings and explored their associations with sexual behavior. We identified five subcultural groupings: sexually adventurous; bear tribes; alternative queer; party scene; and sexually conservative. Higher scores on the sexually adventurous measure was associated with being older, having more gay friends, being HIV-positive, and being more sexually active. It was also independently associated with unprotected anal intercourse with casual partners (AOR 1.82; 95 % CI 1.20-2.76; p = 0.005). HIV prevention strategies need to account for the different subcultural groupings in which GBM participate. Measures of engagement with gay subcultures are useful indicators of differential rates of risk behavior and modes of participation in gay community life. Men in more sexually adventurous subcultures are more likely to engage in sexual risk behavior.

It has been estimated that the majority of global HIV infections among gay and bisexual men (GBM) can be attributed to sex within a committed relationship. In Australia, however, negotiated safety, whereby HIV-negative regular partners agree to discard condoms with each other but commit to consistent condom use with other partners, has been promoted as a key component of the HIV prevention response. We asked GBM recently diagnosed with HIV to describe their relationship to the person they believed to be the source of their infection ('source person'). The majority (66.1%) ascribed their infection to a casual partner. A further 23.3% ascribed their infection to a non-committed and non-romantic partner (or 'fuckbuddy'). Only 10.6% believed they had acquired their HIV from a 'boyfriend' in the context of a committed romantic relationship, and 51.7% of these occurred within the first 3 months following their first sexual contact. Most men (61.5%) believed they had acquired their HIV infection on the first occasion they had sex with the source person. In the Australian context, negotiated safety appears to have minimised infections between regular partners. However, many HIV infections between regular partners may not be in the context of a romantic committed relationship, and yet this distinction between types of regular partners has been all but ignored. Furthermore, in this sample, most infections occurred on the occasion of first meeting, suggesting that the most useful indicators of risk may be the characteristics, contexts, and lengths of sexual partnerships and how sex is negotiated, rather than how GBM categorize their partner. Findings suggest more new HIV infections occur in new partnerships, than in established relationships.

Gay men increasingly use non condom-based risk reduction strategies to reduce the possibility of HIV transmission. Such strategies rely on men's knowledge and communication with each other, but how they employ these strategies may depend as much on their attitudes toward risk and pleasure. We explored current beliefs about safe sex, sexual desire and risk behavior in an online survey of 2306 Australian gay men. The survey included free text components to explore men's beliefs about risk and pleasure. We conducted a principal components factor analysis on the safe sex belief items in the survey, and thematic analysis of the qualitative material was used to interrogate the concepts underpinning these beliefs. We identified two measures of safe sex beliefs: risk reduction optimism (HRRO; α = 0.703); and viral load optimism (α = 0.674). In multivariate analysis, unprotected anal intercourse with casual partners (UAIC) was associated with HRRO among non HIV-positive men only (p < 0.001), but, regardless of HIV serostatus, UAIC was associated with a belief that serosorting could be an effective risk reduction strategy and with being more sexually adventurous in general. Using the qualitative data we identified four themes in how men think about HIV: 'seeking certainty', 'regretful actions', 'nothing is safe', and 'acting on beliefs'. Each theme interacted with the safe sex beliefs measures to provide a highly contextualised understanding of men's beliefs about safe in specific circumstances. Gay men think about the risk of HIV transmission in qualitatively different ways depending on specific circumstances. While measures of belief about relative risk of HIV transmission are useful indicators of men's propensity to take risk, they oversimplify men's thinking about risk, and fail to account for the role of desire, both in influencing men's thinking about risk, and in how they balance their perception of relative risk against the pursuit of pleasure.