5A 1 Profile of Anonymous Partnerships Among Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM) and Transgender Women (TW) Recently Diagnosed with HIV and/or Other STIs in Lima, Peru

Thursday, June 12, 2014: 8:00 AM
Dogwood B
Amaya Perez-Brumer, MSc1, Catherine Oldenburg, MPH2, Eddy Segura, MD, MPH3, H. Javier Salvatierra, MD4, Jorge Sanchez, MD, MPH4, Jesus Peinado, MD, MS4, Javier Lama, MD, MPH4 and Jesse Clark, MD, MSc3, 1Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Columbia Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, 2Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, 3David Geffen School of Medicine and Program in Global Health, University of California, Los Angeles, 4Asociación Civil Impacta Salud y Educación, Lima, Peru

Background: Partner notification (PN) among MSM/TW diagnosed with HIV/STI is a key strategy for controlling HIV/STI transmission. Anonymous partnerships are an important barrier to PN and associated with sexual risk behavior. Limited research has examined the profile of MSM/TW who engage in anonymous sex.

Methods:  HIV/STI-infected MSM/TW, diagnosed within the past month, participated in a cross-sectional survey assessing anticipated PN. Participants reported recent sexual partner types and characteristics of up to 3 recent partners. A multivariable generalized estimating equation (GEE) model was used to assess participant- and partnership-level characteristics associated with anonymous partnerships as compared to MSM/TW not reporting anonymous partners.

Results: Among 395 participants, 36.0% (n=142) reported sex with an anonymous partner in the last three months. These participants reported a mean of 8.6 anonymous partners (SD 17.0).  21% of individuals reported an anonymous partner as one of their last three partnerships, of whom 10% of participants were TW and 90% MSM. MSM/TW reporting anonymous partners had a mean age of 31.8 (SD=8.1) and 55.6% had a high school degree. The majority of participants reported sexual role versatility; 66.3% versatile ‘moderno’, 21.7% bottom ‘pasivo’ and 12.1% top ‘activo’.  Distribution of HIV/STI diagnoses was: 58.8% STI only, 15.0% HIV only and 26.3% HIV/STI co-infection.  In a multivariable model, significant factors associated with an anonymous partner included: participant age (AOR: 1.05, CI:1.05-10.09), education (AOR:1.20, CI: 1.15-4.21), gay identity (AOR:0.16, CI: 0.03-0.88), or “moderno’ role (AOR:11.98, CI:3.07-46.63); and partner gender: female (AOR: 3.54, CI:1.34-9.36) or TW (AOR: 4.78, CI:1.06-21.50).  Participants were less likely to indicate that they planned to disclose their HIV/STI to anonymous partners than non-anonymous partners (AOR 0.41, CI:0.22-0.76).

Conclusions:  Newly HIV/STI-infected MSM/TW with anonymous sex partners present an important challenge for partner notification. Partner notification interventions need to develop targeted strategies for Latin American MSM/TW who engage in anonymous partnerships.