ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024
Patterns of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in different anatomical sites among Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) users in Brazil.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors Associated with Condomless Anal Sex and Absence of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Use Among Brazilian Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Cross-Sectional Study.Infectious disease reports · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe presence of untreated sexually transmitted infections (STIs) significantly increases the chance of acquiring HIV. In Brazil, testing for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) among Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) users is insufficient, and syndromic treatment is a priority in clinical practice. Multi-site testing for CT/NG improves thescreening of asymptomatic cases and ensures timely treatment. Therefore, it is essential for HIV prevention. This study aims to test the importance of two-site testing for better screening of these pathogens and to determine whether the presence of symptoms is an indicator of CT/NG infection.
methodsThis is a cross-sectional study carried out in four public infectious diseases clinics in São Paulo State, Brazil between January of 2022 and March of 2023. All participants had an anal swab and a first-pass or mid-stream urine collected for CT/NG analysis by Polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Data about sociodemographic, sexual behavioural and clinical aspects were collected. Pathway analysis was used to examine the direct and indirect relationships between variables according to the theoretical model.
resultsWe screened 171 PrEP users which had two samples collected, resulting in 342 samples. Comparing the anatomic sites, the urine samples showed lower sensitivity for CT and NG than anal samples. Gonorrhoea was directly linked to lower age (β= -0.161, p = 0.001). Time of PrEP use was directly associated with CT infection (β = 0.202; p = 0.042) and inversely associated with dysuria (β= -0.121, p = 0.009). Lower occurrence of yellow-green secretion was linked to detection of CT (β= -0.089, p = 0.005) and NG (β= -0.048, p = 0.002) infections. Foul-smelling discharge was directly associated with CT (β = 0.275, p = 0.004) and NG (β = 0.295, p = 0.037) infection.
conclusionThe symptoms are a bad indicator of CT and NG infection, and the screening must be done in more than one site since most of the positive results would be missed if only urines were tested. In the case of testing only one anatomical site, specifically the urethra, the CT/NG incidence and prevalence would be underestimated. The two-sites testing improves detection rates of CT/NG, and PrEP follow-up benefits people offering STI testing.
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.