ArticleThe Lancet. Public health2020
Use of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among men who have sex with men in England: data from the AURAH2 prospective study.
Article in The Lancet. Public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Running with Scissors: a Systematic Review of Substance Use and the Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Care Continuum Among Sexual Minority Men.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2022Pooled it
- Barriers and Facilitators to Oral HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Use in Australia: A Scoping Review Comparing Findings to Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.AIDS and behavior · 2026Review
- Achieving reimbursable PrEP is insufficient to increase and diversify the users attending community-based services.HIV medicine · 2026Article
- Trends and Correlates of Post-exposure Prophylaxis Utilization Among Men Who Have Sex with Men in Qingdao, China: A 2023-2024 Prospective Cohort Study.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- HIV PrEP use and unmet need among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men in London: An analysis of community cross-sectional surveys in England 2019-2022.HIV medicine · 2026Article
- Chemsex and uptake of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among adult cisgender gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men worldwide: a systematic review with meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Chemsex Interventions for Men Who Have Sex With Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2025Review
- HIV incidence and adherence after pre-exposure prophylaxis initiation in key populations in Indonesia: Findings from a real-world pilot program 2021-2023.IJID regions · 2025Article
- Predictors of starting and stopping chemsex in men who have sex with men in England: findings from the AURAH2 prospective study.Sexually transmitted infections · 2023Article
- Predictors of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Uptake in a Sexual Health Clinic With Rapid PrEP Initiation.Open forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Rate and Predictors of Ineffective HIV Protection in African Men Who Have Sex with Men Taking Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis.AIDS and behavior · 2022Article
- Loss to Follow-Up from HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Care in Men Who Have Sex with Men in West Africa.Viruses · 2022Article
- Examining provincial PrEP coverage and characterizing PrEP awareness and use among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal, 2017-2020.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2022Article
- Socio-behavioral correlates of pre-exposure prophylaxis use and correct adherence in men who have sex with men in West Africa.BMC public health · 2022Article
- PrEP use and unmet PrEP-need among men who have sex with men in London prior to the implementation of a national PrEP programme, a cross-sectional study from June to August 2019.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Observational
- Review
- Implementation and Access to Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for Human Immunodeficiency Virus by Men Who Have Sex With Men in Europe.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
- Could disparities in PrEP uptake limit the public health benefit?The Lancet. Public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince October, 2017 (and until October, 2020), pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has only been available in England, UK, through the PrEP Impact Trial, by purchasing it from some genitourinary medicine clinics, or via online sources. Here we report changes from 2013 to 2018 in PrEP and postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) awareness and use among HIV-negative gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) and assess predictors of PrEP initiation.
methodsIn the prospective cohort study Attitudes to, and Understanding of Risk of Acquisition of HIV 2 (AURAH2), MSM were recruited from three sexual health clinics in England: two in London and one in Brighton, UK. Men were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older and HIV-negative or of unknown HIV status. Participants self-completed a baseline paper questionnaire at one of the three clinics between July 30, 2013, and April 30, 2016, and were subsequently able to complete 4-monthly and annual online questionnaires, which were available between March 1, 2015, and March 31, 2018, and collected information on sociodemographics, health and wellbeing, HIV status, and sexual behaviours. PrEP and PEP use in the previous 12 months was obtained at baseline and in annual questionnaires. We assessed trends over calendar time in 3-month periods from first enrolment to the end of the study period (July-December, 2013, was counted as one period) in use of PrEP and PEP using generalised estimating equation logistic models. We used age-adjusted Poisson models to assess factors associated with PrEP initiation among participants who reported never having used PrEP at baseline.
findings1162 men completed a baseline questionnaire, among whom the mean age was 34 years (SD 10·4), and of those with available data, 942 (82%) of 1150 were white, 1076 (94%) of 1150 were gay, and 857 (74%) of 1159 were university educated. 622 (54%) of 1162 men completed at least one follow-up online questionnaire, of whom 483 (78%) completed at least one annual questionnaire. Overall, PrEP use in the past year increased from 0% (none of 28 respondents) in July to December, 2013, to 43% (23 of 53) in January to March, 2018. The corresponding increase in PrEP use among men who reported condomless sex with two or more partners was from 0% (none of 13 respondents) to 78% (21 of 27). PEP use peaked in April to June, 2016, at 28% (41 of 147 respondents), but decreased thereafter to 8% (four of 53) in January to March, 2018. Among 460 men who had never used PrEP at baseline, predictors of initiating PrEP included age 40-44 years (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 4·25, 95% CI 1·14-15·79) and 45 years and older (3·59, 1·08-11·97) versus younger than 25 years; and after adjustment for age, recent HIV test (5·17, 1·89-14·08), condomless sex (5·01, 2·16-11·63), condomless sex with two or more partners (5·43, 2·99-9·86), group sex (1·69, 1·01-2·84), and non-injection chemsex-related drugs use (2·86, 1·67-4·91) in the past 3 months, PEP use (4·69, 2·83-7·79) in the past 12 months, and calendar year (Jan 1, 2017, to March 31, 2018 vs July 30, 2013, to Dec 31, 2015: 21·19, 9·48-47·35). Non-employment (0·35, 0·14-0·91) and unstable or no housing (vs homeowner 0·13, 0·02-0·95) were associated with reduced rates of PrEP initiation after adjustment for age. About half of PrEP was obtained via the internet, even after the PrEP Impact trial had started (11 [48%] of 23 respondents in January to March, 2018).
interpretationPrEP awareness and use increased substantially from 2013 to 2018 among a cohort of MSM in England. Improving access to PrEP by routine commissioning by National Health Service England could increase PrEP use among all eligible MSM, but should include public health strategies to target socioeconomic and demographic disparities in knowledge and use of PrEP.
fundingNational Institute for Health Research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.