Testing paradox may explain increased observed prevalence of bacterial STIs among MSM on HIV PrEP: A modeling study

4Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is transforming global HIV prevention, but its implementation coincides with observations of rising bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) rates among men who have sex with men, raising questions about whether PrEP is preventing one epidemic while facilitating others. To reconcile this apparent contradiction, we developed a minimal dynamical model of the simultaneous transmission of HIV and chlamydia (as an example of a curable STI). The model integrates three key mechanisms: 1) risk-mediated self-protective behavior, 2) reduction in condom use among PrEP users, and 3) PrEP-related asymptomatic STI screening. We show that these mechanisms can generate a “testing paradox:” True STI prevalence may decline while observed trends rise. This paradox emerges because increased PrEP uptake amplifies screening intensity, which can lower transmission but simultaneously inflate detection. By systematically mapping the parameter space of PrEP uptake, screening frequency, and risk perception, we identify broad and plausible conditions under which the paradox arises. Our findings reconcile conflicting epidemiological evidence and remark that the net effect of PrEP on STI dynamics depends critically on asymptomatic screening strategies. These results highlight the potential dual role of PrEP programs in reducing both HIV and bacterial STI incidence, while emphasizing the need to align screening and treatment policies to maximize benefits and minimize risks, e.g., antimicrobial resistance.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Müller, L., Mallick, P., Marín-Carballo, A. B., Dönges, P., Kettlitz, R. J. N., Klett-Tammen, C. J., … Contreras, S. (2025). Testing paradox may explain increased observed prevalence of bacterial STIs among MSM on HIV PrEP: A modeling study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 122(44). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2524944122

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free