Trends in HIV post-exposure prophylaxis following sexual exposure in Brazil (2011–2019)

Ribeiro, Kennedy Crepalde; Costa, Juliana de Oliveira; Pearson, Sallie‐Anne; Silveira, Micheline Rosa; Mendes, Jullye Campos; Santos, Simone Furtado dos; Cruz, Márcio Afonso; Ceccato, Maria das Graças Braga

doi:10.1007/s10461-022-03737-y

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Importantly, nPEP awareness and knowledge has increased over time among patients, although certain risk groups, such as nonwhite men who have sex with men (MSM) and cisgender women, have been shown to have less awareness and knowledge [6][7][8][9][10]. The few regional studies that have examined longitudinal nPEP trends have shown low rates of prescribing [11][12][13][14][15][16]. However, the lack of national studies on nPEP trends leaves a gap of understanding in how the use of this HIV prevention tool has changed over time, if at all, and the characteristics of the patients who use it.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends of nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis in the United States

McCormick,

Sullivan,

Qato

et al. 2023

Aids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To describe national annual rates of non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP) in the United States. Design: Retrospective cohort study of commercially insured individuals in the Merative MarketScan Database from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2019. Methods: Patients ≥13-years prescribed nPEP per recommended Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines were identified using pharmacy claims. Rates of use were described overall and stratified by sex, age group, and region. These rates were qualitatively compared to the diagnosis rates of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) observed in the data. Joinpoint analysis identified inflection points of nPEP use. Results: 11,397 nPEP users were identified, with a mean age of 33.7 years. Most were males (64.6%) and lived in the south (33.2%) and northeast (32.4%). The rate of nPEP use increased 515%, from 1.42 nPEP users per 100,000 enrollees in 2010 to 8.71 nPEP users per 100,00 enrollees in 2019. The comparative nPEP use rates among subgroups largely mirrored their HIV diagnosis rates, i.e., subgroups with a higher HIV rate had higher nPEP use. In the Joinpoint analysis significant growth was observed from 2012–2015 (estimated annual percentage change [EAPC]: 45.8%; 95% CI: 29.4 – 64.3) followed by a more moderate increase from 2015 – 2019 (EAPC 16.0%; 95% CI: 12.6 – 19.6). Conclusions: nPEP use increased from 2010 to 2019, but not equally across all risk groups. Further policy interventions should be developed to reduce barriers and ensure adequate access to this important HIV prevention tool.

show abstract