Observational studyClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2022
The Natural History of Rectal Gonococcal and Chlamydial Infections: The ExGen Study.
Observational study in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mechanisms, management and prevention of anorectal sexually transmitted infections.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2026Review
- An agent-based platform for simulating the impact of chlamydia vaccine in the US population.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Prevalence, Duration, and Severity of Rectal Symptoms Among Men Who Have Sex With Men With Rectal Sexually Transmitted Infections.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Gonorrhea Management in High-, Limited- and No-Resource Settings: Implications in the Context of Antimicrobial Resistance.International journal of dermatology · 2026Review
- Chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening and diagnosis by anatomical site among individuals with opposite-sex partners: a rapid review.Sexually transmitted infections · 2025Article
- The Influence of Epidemiologic Context on the Success of Partner Notification Programs: Analysis of Gonorrhea Transmission Dynamics.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Effects of improved partner notification on the transmission of HIV andSexually transmitted infections · 2025Article
- High Incidence and Duration of Antibiotic Use Among a Cohort of Men Who Have Sex With Men in Seattle, Washington.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Comparison of IgG serum antibodies, electronic health records and self-report in estimating past infection withSexual health · 2024Article
- Effects of doxycycline post-exposure prophylaxis for prevention of sexually transmitted infections on gonorrhoea prevalence and antimicrobial resistance among men who have sex with men in the USA: a modelling study.The Lancet. Microbe · 2024Article
- Estimating Partnership Duration among MSM in Belgium-A Modeling Study.Infectious disease reports · 2024Article
- Changes in Inflammatory Cytokine Levels in Rectal Mucosa Associated With Neisseria gonorrheae and/or Chlamydia trachomatis Infection and Treatment Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in Lima, Peru.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Comparison of the burden of self-reported bacterial sexually transmitted infections among men having sex with men across 68 countries on four continents.BMC public health · 2023Article
- HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis and diagnoses of sexually transmitted infections - observational data from German checkpoints, 01/2019-08/2021.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Incidence and Duration of Pharyngeal Chlamydia Among a Cohort of Men Who Have Sex With Men.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2022Article
- Controversies and evidence on Chlamydia testing and treatment in asymptomatic women and men who have sex with men: a narrative review.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe duration of rectal gonococcal and chlamydial infection remains unknown. This basic epidemiologic parameter is needed to understand transmission dynamics.
methodsWe conducted a prospective, longitudinal, observational cohort study of 140 men who have sex with men (MSM) at risk of gonorrhea and chlamydia acquisition. For 48 weeks, enrolled men collected rectal swabs (Aptima multi-test kit) at home and responded to an electronic survey about sexual behavior and health conditions weekly. Swabs remained untested until participants completed the study. We used Kaplan-Meier estimates to determine the median duration of infection, censoring infections for treatment, loss to follow-up, and end-of-study. We used log-rank test to compare duration of infection by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status, history of infection with gonorrhea or chlamydia, and coinfection with the other pathogen.
results140 enrolled MSM contributed 70.5 person-years of follow-up. Eighteen men had 20 incident rectal gonococcal infections, which persisted for 2-23 weeks; 30% were censored for treatment. The estimated median duration of rectal gonorrhea was 9 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3-12 weeks). Twenty-four men experienced 32 rectal chlamydial infections, persisting between 2 and 42 weeks; 60% were censored. The estimated duration of rectal chlamydia was 13 weeks (95% CI: 6 weeks-undefined). There were no differences in the duration of rectal gonorrhea or chlamydia by HIV status, history of chlamydia/gonorrhea, or coinfection.
conclusionsOn average, rectal gonorrhea and chlamydial infections last 2-3 months, although some infections persisted for 6-11 months. Further understanding into predictors of persistence is needed.
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.