SynthesisJournal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)2026
Circumcision for HIV Prevention in Men Who Have Sex With Men: An Updated Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCircumcision reduces HIV risk for men who have sex with women, but for men who have sex with men (MSM), prior meta-analyses were ambiguous because of inconsistent, highly confounded data suggesting regional differences. This has left the weight of evidence unclear even after a small 2024 trial in primarily insertive MSM (PI-MSM) in China showed protection. Any protection would be for PI-MSM and could have substantial impact given high incidence.
settingNo restrictions.
methodsWe performed an updated literature search on the association of male circumcision with HIV among MSM. We conducted descriptive analyses, and a random-effects meta-analysis among PI-MSM. To isolate the protective effect of circumcision from confounders, we then performed a confounder-adjusted meta-analysis, comparing the effect of circumcision on HIV status among PI-MSM versus other MSM, testing for publication bias (funnel plot asymmetry) and regional heterogeneity (United States/Canada/Europe/Australia vs. Asia/Africa/Latin America).
resultsForty-nine studies were included in the descriptive analysis, 13 in the unadjusted meta-analysis, and 10 in the confounder-adjusted meta-analysis. In the unadjusted meta-analysis, circumcision was associated with a lower HIV risk among PI-MSM (odds ratio (OR) = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.98); publication bias and heterogeneity were present. In the confounder-adjusted analysis, the additional effect of circumcision in the PI-MSM group-a ratio of ORs-was 0.53 (95% CI: 0.34 to 0.83), a significant, substantial protective association. Regional heterogeneity ( P = 0.65) and publication bias ( P = 0.34) were not present.
conclusionsAmong PI-MSM, circumcision was protective against HIV. Findings support male circumcision as an effective HIV prevention method for PI-MSM.
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.