1 / 28

Male circumcision and risk of HIV infection: Current epidemiological data

Male circumcision and risk of HIV infection: Current epidemiological data. Helen Weiss London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, UK. HIV seroprevalence in adults, end 2000. Systematic review, 1999. Inclusion criteria: Studies in Africa Female to male transmission of HIV-1

tamma
Télécharger la présentation

Male circumcision and risk of HIV infection: Current epidemiological data

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Male circumcision and risk of HIV infection: Current epidemiological data Helen Weiss London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, UK

  2. HIV seroprevalence in adults, end 2000

  3. Systematic review, 1999 • Inclusion criteria: • Studies in Africa • Female to male transmission of HIV-1 • Published papers only (up to April 1999) • 28 studies identified • Summary risk ratio (RR) obtained using random-effects meta analysis

  4. RR<1 reduced risk of HIV among circumcised men RR=1 (no effect) Barongo-all Kelly Population-based studies Quigley Serwadda Urassa-2 Urassa-3 Bwayo High risk studies Cameron Diallo Mbugua Sassan-Morokro Simonsen Tyndall Other studies Seed Urassa-4 Combined .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 1 2 3 4 5 Adjusted relative risk

  5. Updated analysis - Sep 2002 • Aim: To update the meta-analysis and include data from non-African countries with high HIV prevalence • Inclusion criteria: • Published studies of F-M transmission in developing countries • Abstracts from XIV AIDS conference included

  6. Studies included • 11 additional studies identified • Published literature (9) • Abstracts from XIV International AIDS conference (2) • 5 cohort studies • 2 non-African studies • Total of 38 studies, of which 22 adjusted for confounding

  7. Study characteristics • 17 population-based • 12 cross-sectional, 3 cohort, 2 case-control • 6 Mwanza, 4 Rakai, 3 Kenyan • 18 high risk groups • STD clinic attendees, truck drivers, TB patients, discordant couples • 11 cross-sectional, 5 cohort, 3 case-control • 7 Nairobi studies • 3 others - Volunteers, factory workers

  8. Population-based studies - crude RRs * Additional study - not included in published meta-analysis

  9. Population based studies - adjusted RRs * Additional study - not included in published meta-analysis

  10. Population-based studies

  11. High risk groups - crude RRs * Additional study - not included in published meta-analysis

  12. High risk groups - adjusted RRs * Additional study - not included in published meta-analysis

  13. High risk group studies

  14. Analysis by type of study

  15. Is the effect real? • Strong, consistent effect • very unlikely to be to due to random error • Significant, strong effect in cohort studies (less susceptible to bias) • Effect strengthens on adjustment for confounders • effect unlikely to be due to residual confounding

  16. Limitations • Not a fully systematic review • Strength of effect may be over-estimated as studies not finding an effect are more difficult to identify • But - included studies found in recent Cochrane systematic review • Observational studies only • Possibility of selection biases and residual confounding • Significant heterogeneity between studies • Effect may differ in different populations

  17. Effect of age at circumcision • Many African tribes circumcise around puberty. • Biologically plausible that MC has similar effect irrespective of age at circumcision • Only 2 studies have examined HIV risk in relation to age at circumcision • Kelly et al; AIDS 1999; 13:399-405 • Quigley et al: AIDS 1997; 11:237-248 • Conflicting and inconclusive results

  18. Does MC affect risk of HIV transmission? • Difficult to assess epidemiologically • Women may have more than one partner • More scope for misclassification • Biologically less plausible than effect of acquisition of HIV

  19. M-F transmission of HIV • Uganda - cohort study of discordant couples Quinn et al; NEJM 2000; 342:921-9 • Some evidence of reduced transmission among circumcised males • RR=0.41, 95% CI 0.1-1.1 • Brazil - cross sectional couples study Castilho et al; XIV AIDS conf. abstr. C10907 • No effect of circumcision on HIV prevalence in female partners of 377 HIV positive men

  20. STIs Lack of circumcision HIV

  21. Male circumcision & other STIs

  22. MC & cervical cancer • Most common cancer in many developing countries • HPV infection - major cause • Geographically clusters with penile cancer • Both cancers associated with HPV infection • Lower risk of HPV infection among circumcised men • Lower risk of penile ca. among circumcised men

  23. MC & cervical cancer • Multi-country analysis of 1913 couples Castellsague et al: NEJM 2002:346:1105-12 • Brazil, Colombia, Thailand, Philippines, Spain • Adjusted OR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.49-1.04 • In monogamous women: • Adjusted OR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.49-1.14 • Penile HPV infection in male partner: • Adjusted OR = 0.37 (95% CI 0.2-0.9)

  24. Current research needs Biological mechanism  Attitudes & feasibility of introducing MC among non-circumcising communities Effect of age at circumcision Effect of hygiene practices ? Classification of circumcision through physical examination rather than self-report  Data on safety of current MC practices ? Effect of MC among MSM ? Male-female transmission ? Effect of MC on other viral infections of public health importance (e.g. HPV, HSV)

  25. Conclusions • Observational evidence for a protective effect of MC on risk of HIV infection is strong and consistent • BUT cannot exclude selection biases and residual confounding in observational studies • RCTs will address many of these limitations Probably not ready to actively promote MC as an HIV prevention measure

  26. What should we do now? • Disseminate current evidence • Continue studies of acceptability & feasibility of MC in non-circumcising populations with high incidence of HIV • Assess safety of current circumcising procedures • Develop affordable services for safe voluntary MC • Develop educational materials that: • emphasise that MC may reduce but not eliminate risk of HIV infection • Separate out issues of male and female circumcision

  27. Summary of 2002 analysis • All studies (n=38) • crude RR=0.52; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.64 • adjusted RR=0.44; 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.53 • Population-based studies - adjusted (n=10) • RR=0.57; 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.70 • High risk groups - adjusted (n=10) • RR=0.31; 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.42

More Related