Can we screen less frequently for STI among PrEP users? Assessing the effect of biannual STI screening on timing of diagnosis and transmission risk in the AMPrEP Study.

BACKGROUND: In many countries, HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) users are screened quarterly for STIs. We assessed the consequences of less frequent STI testing. We also assessed determinants of asymptomatic STI and potential for onward transmission. METHODS: Using data from the AMPrEP study, we assessed the proportion of syphilis, and genital, anal, and pharyngeal chlamydia and gonorrhoea diagnoses which would have been delayed with biannual versus quarterly screening. We assessed the potential for onward transmission by examining reported condomless anal sex (CAS) in periods after to-be-omitted visits when screening biannually. We assessed determinants of incident asymptomatic STIs using Poisson regression and calculated individual risk scores on the basis of the coefficients from this model. RESULTS: We included 366 participants. Median follow-up was 47 months (IQR 43-50). 1,183STIs were diagnosed, of which 932(79%) asymptomatic. With biannual screening, 483 asymptomatic STIs (52%) diagnoses would have been delayed at 364 study visits. Of these visits, 129 (35%), 240 (66%) and 265 (73%) were followed by periods of CAS with steady, known casual or unknown casual partners, respectively. Older participants had a lower risk of asymptomatic STI (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.86/10-year increase, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.92), while CAS with known (IRR 1.36, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.68) and unknown (IRR 1.86, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.34) casual partners and chemsex (IRR 1.51, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.78) increased the risk. The individual risk scores had limited predictive value (sensitivity=0.70 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.74), specificity=0.50 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.51)). CONCLUSION: Reducing the STI screening frequency to biannually among PrEP users will likely result in delayed diagnoses, potentially driving onward transmission. Although determinants for asymptomatic STIs were identified, predictive power was low.

The impact of COVID-19-related restrictions in 2020 on sexual healthcare use, pre-exposure prophylaxis use, and sexually transmitted infection incidence among men who have sex with men in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: We studied the effects of restrictions related to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2; coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) pandemic on the use of sexual healthcare and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and on the incidence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among men who have sex with men (MSM) in a prospective, open-label PrEP demonstration study (AMPrEP) in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. METHODS: We retrieved data from 2019 to 2020 for participants with one or more study visit in 2019 (n = 305) and from two COVID-19 questionnaires (2020: n = 203; 2021: n = 160). Analyses were stratified for three periods of pandemic-related restrictions (first: 15 March 2020-15 June 2020; second: 16 June 2020-15 September 2020; third: 16 September 2020-31 December 2020 or 1 April 2021 for the COVID-19 questionnaire). Endpoints included returning for care during the pandemic, PrEP use (increased/unchanged vs. deceased/stopped, relative to 2019), and any STI/HIV. We modelled determinants of care and PrEP use via multivariable logistic regression and STI incidence using piecewise Poisson regression, comparing the 2020 and 2019 periods. RESULTS: Of the 305 MSM included in the analysis, 72.8% returned for care during the pandemic, and this was significantly more likely among daily (vs. event-driven) PrEP users (p < 0.001). Increased/unchanged PrEP use ranged from 55.2% to 58.1% across the three pandemic periods and was more likely among those reporting chemsex in the first (p = 0.001) and third (p = 0.020) periods and among those reporting an increased/unchanged number of sex partners during the second period (p = 0.010). STI incidence was significantly lower in 2020 than in 2019 during the first period (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28-0.68) and not significantly different during the second (IRR 1.38; 95% CI 0.95-2.00) and third (IRR 1.42; 95% CI 0.86-2.33) periods. No HIV was diagnosed. CONCLUSION: COVID-19-related restrictions coincided with reduced care and PrEP use. Changes in STI incidence suggest delayed diagnoses. Ways to ensure continued access to sexual healthcare during restrictions are needed.

SARS-CoV-2 Prevalence on and Incidence after Arrival in Travelers on Direct Flights from Cape Town, South Africa to Munich, Germany Shortly after Occurrence of the Omicron Variant in November/December 2021: Results from the OMTRAIR Study.

The highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2-variant B.1.1.529 (Omicron) first appeared in South Africa in November 2021. In order to study Omicron entry to Germany, its occurrence related to incoming airline travel, symptomatology and compliance with entry regulations and recommendations, we conducted a cross-sectional study, followed by a retrospective cohort study among passengers and crew on 19 direct flights from Cape Town, South Africa, to Munich, Germany, between 26 November and 23 December 2021. Travelers were mandatorily PCR-tested on arrival and invited to complete an online questionnaire. SARS-CoV-2-prevalence on arrival was 3.3% (n = 90/2728), and 93% were Omicron. Of the passengers, 528 (19%) completed the questionnaire. Among participants who tested negative on arrival, self-reported SARS-CoV-2-incidence was 4.3% within 14 days, of whom 74% reported a negative PCR-test ≤ 48 h before boarding, 77% were fully vaccinated, and 90% reported wearing an FFP2/medical mask during flight. We found multiple associations between risk factors and infection on and after arrival, among which having a positive-tested travel partner was the most noteworthy. In conclusion, PCR testing before departure was insufficient to control the introduction of the Omicron variant. Additional measures (e.g., frequent testing, quarantine after arrival or travel ban) should be considered to delay virus introduction in such settings.

Intent to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2 and its determinants across six ethnic groups living in Amsterdam, the Netherlands: A cross-sectional analysis of the HELIUS study.

BACKGROUND: Ethnic minority groups experience a disproportionately high burden of infections, hospitalizations and mortality due to COVID-19, and therefore should be especially encouraged to receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. This study aimed to investigate the intent to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2, along with its determinants, in six ethnic groups residing in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. METHODS: We analyzed data of participants enrolled in the population-based multi-ethnic HELIUS cohort, aged 24 to 79 years, who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and answered questions on vaccination intent from November 23, 2020 to March 31, 2021. During the study period, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the Netherlands became available to individuals working in healthcare or > 75 years old. Vaccination intent was measured by two statements on a 7-point Likert scale and categorized into low, medium, and high. Using ordinal logistic regression, we examined the association between ethnicity and lower vaccination intent. We also assessed determinants of lower vaccination intent per ethnic group. RESULTS: A total of 2,068 participants were included (median age 56 years, interquartile range 46-63). High intent to vaccinate was most common in the Dutch ethnic origin group (369/466, 79.2%), followed by the Ghanaian (111/213, 52.1%), South-Asian Surinamese (186/391, 47.6%), Turkish (153/325, 47.1%), African Surinamese (156/362, 43.1%), and Moroccan ethnic groups (92/311, 29.6%). Lower intent to vaccinate was more common in all groups other than the Dutch group (P < 0.001). Being female, believing that COVID-19 is exaggerated in the media, and being < 45 years of age were common determinants of lower SARS-CoV-2 vaccination intent across most ethnic groups. Other identified determinants were specific to certain ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Lower intent to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2 in the largest ethnic minority groups of Amsterdam is a major public health concern. The ethnic-specific and general determinants of lower vaccination intent observed in this study could help shape vaccination interventions and campaigns.

Factors Associated With Using the COVID-19 Mobile Contact-Tracing App Among Individuals Diagnosed With SARS-CoV-2 in Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, efforts are being made to stop the COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2. Contact tracing and quarantining are key in limiting SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Mathematical models have shown that the time between infection, isolation of cases, and quarantining of contacts are the most important components that determine whether the pandemic can be controlled. Mobile contact-tracing apps could accelerate the tracing and quarantining of contacts, including anonymous contacts. However, real-world observational data on the uptake and determinants of contact-tracing apps are limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to assess the use of a national Dutch contact-tracing app among notified cases diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection and investigate which characteristics are associated with the use of the app. METHODS: Due to privacy regulations, data from the app could not be used. Instead, we used anonymized SARS-CoV-2 routine contact-tracing data collected between October 28, 2020, and February 26, 2021, in the region of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Complete case logistic regression analysis was performed to identify which factors (age, gender, country of birth, municipality, number of close contacts, and employment in either health care or education) were associated with using the app. Age and number of close contacts were modelled as B-splines due to their nonlinear relationship. RESULTS: Of 29,766 SARS-CoV-2 positive cases, 4824 (16.2%) reported app use. Median age of cases was 41 (IQR 29-55) years, and 46.7% (n=13,898) were male. In multivariable analysis, males (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.11, 95% CI 1.04-1.18) and residents of municipalities surrounding Amsterdam were more likely to use the app (Aalsmeer AOR 1.34, 95% CI 1.13-1.58; Ouder-Amstel AOR 1.96, 95% CI 1.54-2.50), while people born outside the Netherlands, particularly those born in non-Western countries (AOR 0.33, 95% CI 0.30-0.36), were less likely to use the app. Odds of app use increased with age until the age of 58 years and decreased sharply thereafter (P<.001). Odds of app use increased with number of contacts, peaked at 8 contacts, and then decreased (P<.001). Individuals working in day care, home care, and elderly nursing homes were less likely to use the app. CONCLUSIONS: Contact-tracing app use among people with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was low in the region of Amsterdam. This diminishes the potential impact of the app by hampering the ability to warn contacts. Use was particularly low among older people, people born outside the Netherlands, and people with many contacts. Use of the app was also relatively low compared to those from some other European countries, some of which had additional features beyond contact tracing, making them potentially more appealing. For the Dutch contact-tracing app to have an impact, uptake needs to be higher; therefore, investing more into promotional efforts and additional features could be considered.

COVID-19 Impacts Across Multiple Life Domains of Vulnerable Socio-Demographic Groups Including Migrants: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study.

Objectives: We assessed the impacts of COVID-19 on multiple life domains across socio-demographic groups in Netherlands. Methods: After the first COVID-19 wave, we distributed online questionnaires among 13,031 participants of the multi-ethnic HELIUS cohort. Questionnaires contained questions on changes in income status, healthy behaviors, mental health, and access to non-COVID-19 health care. We then calculated differences in adjusted proportions of participants that reported negative changes across multiple life domains by migration background, age, sex, education, and occupation. Results: 4,450 individuals (35%) responded, of which 4,294 were included. Older populations and men seemed to be less vulnerable to negative changes in multiple life domains during the COVID-19 pandemic as compared to the pre-pandemic period, while populations with a migration background and lower education/occupation groups seemed to be more vulnerable to negative changes. Conclusion: Not all populations vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality are also more vulnerable to COVID-19 impacts across multiple other life domains. Targeted interventions are needed in socio-demographic groups that are most impacted by COVID-19 in various life domains to prevent a further increase of their already increased risk of chronic diseases after the pandemic.

Ethnic Differences in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalization and Hospital Outcomes in a Multiethnic Population in the Netherlands.

Background: Evidence from the United States and United Kingdom suggests that ethnic minority populations are at an increased risk for developing severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, data from other West-European countries are scarce. Methods: We analyzed data from 1439 patients admitted between February 2020 and January 2021 to 4 main hospitals in Amsterdam and Almere, the Netherlands. Differences in the risk for hospitalization were assessed by comparing demographics to the general population. Using a population-based cohort as reference, we determined differences in the association between comorbidities and COVID-19 hospitalization. Outcomes after hospitalization were analyzed using Cox regression. Results: The hospitalization risk was higher in all ethnic minority groups than in those of Dutch origin, with age-adjusted odds ratios ranging from 2.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-2.6) in Moroccans to 4.5 (95% CI, 3.2-6.0) in Ghanaians. Hypertension and diabetes were similarly associated with COVID-19 hospitalization. For all other comorbidities, we found differential associations. Intensive care unit admission and mortality during 21-day follow-up after hospitalization was comparable between ethnicities. Conclusions: The risk of COVID-19 hospitalization was higher in all ethnic minority groups compared to the Dutch, but the risk of adverse outcomes after hospitalization was similar. Our results suggest that these inequalities may in part be attributable to comorbidities that can be prevented by targeted public health prevention measures. More work is needed to gain insight into the role of other potential factors such as social determinants of health, which might have contributed to the ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 hospitalization.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence and correlates of six ethnic groups living in Amsterdam, the Netherlands: a population-based cross-sectional study, June-October 2020.

OBJECTIVES: It has been suggested that ethnic minorities have been disproportionally affected by the COVID-19. We aimed to determine whether prevalence and correlates of past SARS-CoV-2 exposure varied between six ethnic groups in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Participants aged 25-79 years enrolled in the Healthy Life in an Urban Setting population-based prospective cohort (n=16 889) were randomly selected within ethnic groups and invited to participate in a cross-sectional COVID-19 seroprevalence substudy. OUTCOME MEASURES: We tested participants for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies and collected information on SARS-CoV-2 exposures. We estimated prevalence and correlates of SARS-CoV-2 exposure within ethnic groups using survey-weighted logistic regression adjusting for age, sex and calendar time. RESULTS: Between 24 June and 9 October 2020, we included 2497 participants. Adjusted SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was comparable between ethnic Dutch (24/498; 5.1%, 95% CI 2.8% to 7.4%), South-Asian Surinamese (22/451; 4.9%, 95% CI 2.2% to 7.7%), African Surinamese (22/400; 8.3%, 95% CI 3.1% to 13.6%), Turkish (30/408; 7.9%, 95% CI 4.4% to 11.4%) and Moroccan (32/391; 7.2%, 95% CI 4.2% to 10.1%) participants, but higher among Ghanaians (95/327; 26.3%, 95% CI 18.5% to 34.0%). 57.1% of SARS-CoV-2-positive participants did not suspect or were unsure of being infected, which was lowest in African Surinamese (18.2%) and highest in Ghanaians (90.5%). Correlates of SARS-CoV-2 exposure varied across ethnic groups, while the most common correlate was having a household member suspected of infection. In Ghanaians, seropositivity was associated with older age, larger household sizes, living with small children, leaving home to work and attending religious services. CONCLUSIONS: No remarkable differences in SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence were observed between the largest ethnic groups in Amsterdam after the first wave of infections. The higher infection seroprevalence observed among Ghanaians, which passed mostly unnoticed, warrants wider prevention efforts and opportunities for non-symptom-based testing.

Differences in SARS-CoV-2 infections during the first and second wave of SARS-CoV-2 between six ethnic groups in Amsterdam, the Netherlands: A population-based longitudinal serological study.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance data in high-income countries have reported more frequent SARS-CoV-2 diagnoses in ethnic minority groups. We examined the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 and its determinants in six ethnic groups in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. METHODS: We analysed participants enrolled in the population-based HELIUS cohort, who were tested for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies and answered COVID-19-related questions between June 24-October 9, 2020 (after the first wave) and November 23, 2020-March 31, 2021 (during the second wave). We modelled SARS-CoV-2 incidence from January 1, 2020-March 31, 2021 using Markov models adjusted for age and sex. We compared incidence between ethnic groups over time and identified determinants of incident infection within ethnic groups. FINDINGS: 2,497 participants were tested after the first wave; 2,083 (83·4%) were tested during the second wave. Median age at first visit was 54 years (interquartile range=44-61); 56·6% were female. Compared to Dutch-origin participants (15·9%), cumulative SARS-CoV-2 incidence was higher in participants of South-Asian Surinamese (25·0%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]=1·66; 95%CI=1·16-2·40), African Surinamese (28·9%, aHR=1·97; 95%CI=1·37-2·83), Turkish (37·0%; aHR=2·67; 95%CI=1·89-3·78), Moroccan (41·9%; aHR=3·13; 95%CI=2·22-4·42), and Ghanaian (64·6%; aHR=6·00; 95%CI=4·33-8·30) origin. Compared to those of Dutch origin, differences in incidence became wider during the second versus first wave for all ethnic minority groups (all p-values for interaction<0·05), except Ghanaians. Having household members with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, larger household size, and low health literacy were common determinants of SARS-CoV-2 incidence across groups. INTERPRETATION: SARS-CoV-2 incidence was higher in the largest ethnic minority groups of Amsterdam, particularly during the second wave. Prevention measures, including vaccination, should be encouraged in these groups. FUNDING: ZonMw, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Dutch Heart Foundation, European Union, European Fund for the Integration of non-EU immigrants.

Hospitalisation rates differed by city district and ethnicity during the first wave of COVID-19 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: It is important to gain insight into the burden of COVID-19 at city district level to develop targeted prevention strategies. We examined COVID-19 related hospitalisations by city district and migration background in the municipality of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. METHODS: We used surveillance data on all PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 hospitalisations in Amsterdam until 31 May 2020, matched to municipal registration data on migration background. We calculated directly standardised (age, sex) rates (DSR) of hospitalisations, as a proxy of COVID-19 burden, per 100,000 population by city district and migration background. We calculated standardised rate differences (RD) and rate ratios (RR) to compare hospitalisations between city districts of varying socio-economic and health status and between migration backgrounds. We evaluated the effects of city district and migration background on hospitalisation after adjusting for age and sex using Poisson regression. RESULTS: Between 29 February and 31 May 2020, 2326 cases (median age 57 years [IQR = 37-74]) were notified in Amsterdam, of which 596 (25.6%) hospitalisations and 287 (12.3%) deaths. 526/596 (88.2%) hospitalisations could be matched to the registration database. DSR were higher in individuals living in peripheral (South-East/New-West/North) city districts with lower economic and health status, compared to central districts (Centre/West/South/East) (RD = 36.87,95%CI = 25.79-47.96;RR = 1.82,95%CI = 1.65-1.99), and among individuals with a non-Western migration background compared to ethnic-Dutch individuals (RD = 57.05,95%CI = 43.34-70.75; RR = 2.36,95%CI = 2.17-2.54). City district and migration background were independently associated with hospitalisation. CONCLUSION: City districts with lower economic and health status and those with a non-Western migration background had the highest burden of COVID-19 during the first wave of COVID-19 in Amsterdam.

Transient Changes in Preexposure Prophylaxis Use and Daily Sexual Behavior After the Implementation of COVID-19 Restrictions Among Men Who Have Sex With Men.

BACKGROUND: We assessed how the Dutch restrictions imposed on March 15, 2020, affected sexual behavior, preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP), and condom use among PrEP users in Amsterdam. METHODS: We used data on (1) PrEP use, (2) anal sex acts, and (3) condom use, per partner type [steady partners (SPs), known casual partners (KCPs), and unknown casual partners (UCPs)], collected daily through a mobile application used between December 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020. We compared the period before versus after March 15, 2020, regarding average proportion of days per week at which each end point was reported and average proportion of anal sex acts covered by PrEP and/or condoms. RESULTS: We included data from 136 men who have sex with men. After March 15, 2020, the proportion of days with anal sex increased with SPs [odds ratio (OR) = 1.26; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.10 to 1.44) and decreased with KCPs (OR = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.82) and UCPs (OR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.48 to 0.61). Shifts in partner types were most profound immediately after March 15, 2020, whereas returning to prerestriction levels mid-May 2020. The proportion of days with PrEP use decreased from 74% before to 58% after March 15, 2020 (P < 0.001). After March 15, 2020, PrEP use during sex decreased with UCPs (ß = -0.36; 95% CI = -0.72 to 0.00) but not with SPs and KCPs. Condom use during sex decreased with KCPs (ß = -0.36; 95% CI = -0.67 to 0.04) and UCPs (ß = -0.24; 95% CI = -0.46 to 0.03) but not with SPs. CONCLUSIONS: MSM decreased sex with casual partners and increased sex with SP, but changes were transient. Decreases in sex acts with casual partners paralleled decreases in PrEP use. However, condom use during sex with casual partners decreased, indicating the importance of continued sexual health services, including sexually transmitted infections screening and PrEP care, during COVID-19 restrictions.

Sexual Behavior and Its Determinants During COVID-19 Restrictions Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in Amsterdam.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of Dutch COVID-19 restrictions on sexual behavior and HIV/sexually transmitted infection (STI) acquisition among men who have sex with men (MSM) participating in the Amsterdam Cohort Studies (ACS) on HIV in Amsterdam. METHODS: ACS participants complete a questionnaire on sexual behavior and are tested for HIV/STI biannually. They may also be tested at the STI clinic in-between study visits. On May 29, 2020, ACS participants were invited to complete an online questionnaire on health, COVID-19 risk perceptions, and sexual behavior. Determinants of reporting casual sex partners (CSP) during COVID-19 restrictions were examined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 683 MSM, 353 (52%; median age, 47 years; interquartile range, 38-53 years) completed the questionnaire. Since COVID-19, 73% reported a reduction in the number of CSP. CSP during COVID-19 restrictions were reported by 133 MSM (38%) and, in multivariable analysis, was associated with not having a college/university degree, being single, lower perceived importance of avoiding COVID-19, number of CSP before COVID-19, and current preexposure prophylaxis use (P < 0.05 for all). During COVID-19 restrictions, no HIV infections were diagnosed, and the STI positivity rate was 8%. CONCLUSION: Since COVID-19, the number of CSP decreased among MSM, and there may have been a temporary reduction in HIV/STI transmission. Some MSM were not fully compliant to social distancing regulations and reported CSP, which was related to prior sexual behavior and low perceived importance of avoiding COVID-19. For these men, it is important to maintain accessible HIV/STI-related testing and care during times of lockdown.