Recent insights suggest the need for the STI field to embrace a more eco-social conceptual framework: A viewpoint.

A large number of countries are being confronted with twin epidemics of increasing STI incidence and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). This has led to calls to intensify STI screening of high STI prevalence populations. The available evidence suggests that this will have little impact on STI prevalence but a significant deleterious effect on AMR. We suggest that this call to intensify STI screening is one of the several errors that stem from the way that the STI-field has been dominated by a biomedical individualistic conceptual framework. This framework views STIs as obligate pathogens that can and should be eradicated by intensive seek-and-destroy activities. We evaluate five types of evidence that suggest that a multi-level, socio-ecological framework would provide a more accurate portrayal of the important determinants of STI prevalence and AMR spread. By incorporating concepts such as limiting STI screening to scenarios with clear evidence of net-benefit and considering 'antimicrobial footprint' thresholds, this framework would be more likely to result in a better balance between targeting STI prevalence whilst minimizing the risk of AMR emerging.

Why Do HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Users Discontinue Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Care? A Mixed Methods Survey in a Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Clinic in Belgium.

It remains unclear why patients discontinue HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) care and to what extent they remain at risk for HIV when they do. We reviewed routinely collected medical records and patient questionnaires and performed an e-mail/telephone survey to assess reasons for discontinuing PrEP care, ongoing risks for HIV infection, and associated factors. Patients with more than two registered PrEP visits from a PrEP clinic in Antwerp, Belgium between June 2017 and February 2020 were included in this study. Patients who did not return for a visit after October 30, 2019 and who were not transferred out were considered as having discontinued PrEP care. A total of 143/1073 patients were considered as having discontinued PrEP care. Patients who discontinued PrEP care were more likely to be younger than those who remained in care (35 vs. 38 years old, p < 0.01). The most common reasons for discontinuation were having stopped using PrEP (62/101, 61.4%) and "COVID-19" (n = 35, 34.7%). The most common reasons for stopping PrEP use was a decreased sexual activity due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19; 21/62, 33.9%) or not COVID-19 related (10/62, 16.1%), a monogamous relationship (20/62, 32.3%) and consistent condom use (7/62, 11.3%). Among respondents who reported about current HIV risk the majority reported being at low risk either by still taking PrEP (32/91, 35.2%), consistently using condoms, or limiting number of sex acts or partners (58/91, 52.7%). No HIV seroconversion was reported.

Antibacterial mouthwash to prevent sexually transmitted infections in men who have sex with men taking HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PReGo): a randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are highly prevalent among men who have sex with men who use HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), which leads to antimicrobial consumption linked to the emergence of antimicrobial resistance. We aimed to assess use of an antiseptic mouthwash as an antibiotic sparing approach to prevent STIs. METHODS: We invited people using PrEP who had an STI in the past 24 months to participate in this single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, AB/BA crossover superiority trial at the Institute of Tropical Medicine in Antwerp, Belgium. Using block randomisation (block size eight), participants were assigned (1:1) to first receive Listerine Cool Mint or a placebo mouthwash. They were required to use the study mouthwashes daily and before and after sex for 3 months each and to ask their sexual partners to use the mouthwash before and after sex. Participants were screened every 3 months for syphilis, chlamydia, and gonorrhoea at the oropharynx, anorectum, and urethra. The primary outcome was combined incidence of these STIs during each 3-month period, assessed in the intention-to-treat population, which included all participants who completed at least the first 3-month period. Safety was assessed as a secondary outcome. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03881007. FINDINGS: Between April 2, 2019, and March 13, 2020, 343 participants were enrolled: 172 in the Listerine followed by placebo (Listerine-placebo) group and 171 in the placebo followed by Listerine (placebo-Listerine) group. The trial was terminated prematurely because of the COVID-19 pandemic. 151 participants completed the entire study, and 89 completed only the first 3-month period. 31 participants withdrew consent, ten were lost to follow-up, and one acquired HIV. In the Listerine-placebo group, the STI incidence rate was 140·4 per 100 person-years during the Listerine period, and 102·6 per 100 person-years during the placebo period. In the placebo-Listerine arm, the STI incidence rate was 133·9 per 100 person-years during the placebo period, and 147·5 per 100 person-years during the Listerine period. We did not find that Listerine significantly reduced STI incidence (IRR 1·17, 95% CI 0·84-1·64). Numbers of adverse events were not significantly higher than at baseline and were similar while using Listerine and placebo. Four serious adverse events (one HIV-infection, one severe depression, one Ludwig's angina, and one testicular carcinoma) were not considered to be related to use of mouthwash. INTERPRETATION: Our findings do not support the use of Listerine Cool Mint as a way to prevent STI acquisition among high-risk populations. FUNDING: Belgian Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO 121·00).

The impact of physical restriction measures imposed during the two waves of COVID-19 on chlamydia and gonorrhea diagnoses in Belgium. Results of an sexually transmitted infection clinic.

Background: During the first two waves of COVID-19, several physical restriction measurements were imposed in Belgium. Our aim was to explore the impact of these restriction measures on the number of tests and positivity rate of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT)/Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) before, during, and after the two lockdowns in Belgium. Methods:Chlamydia trachomatis/Neisseria gonorrhoeae molecular data of a Belgian STI clinic were extracted for 2019 and 2020, and both years were divided into four periods (pre-lockdown 1, lockdown 1, after lockdown 1, and lockdown 2). Weekly testing rates and positivity rate for both STIs were estimated, and mixed-effects logistic regression was used to explore statistical significant changes between both years, and the different periods were compared with the corresponding time period in 2019. The same analysis was done for pre-exposure prophylaxis(PrEP) users only. Results: No overall significant changes in positivity rate were found for either CT (8.0% in 2019 and 7.8% in 2020) or NG (4.5% in 2019 and 5.5% in 2020). Besides a significant drop in the number of CT/NG tests during lockdown 1 (decrease of 87%) and a subsequent increase in NG positivity rate (p > 0.05), no changes in CT/NG positivity rate were found in the other periods. The highest positivity rate for either CT or NG was found in lockdown 2 (15.1% vs 12.4% in 2019). The number of CT/NG tests in lockdown 2 was still 25% lower than 2019 levels. Subanalysis of only PrEP users revealed the same trend; however, the number of CT/NG tests in lockdown 2 was exactly the same as in 2019. Conclusion: Despite a significant decline in absolute CT or NG cases in lockdown 1, which was most likely a consequence of both physical distancing and reduced testing, CT/NG testing and positivity rates returned to pre-corona levels in lockdown 2, which may depict physical distancing fatigue.

Emergence of zoonoses such as COVID-19 reveals the need for health sciences to embrace an explicit eco-social conceptual framework of health and disease.

An accurate understanding of why zoonoses such as SARS-CoV-2 are emerging at an increased rate, is vital to prevent future pandemics from the approximately 700,000 viruses with zoonotic potential. Certain authors have argued that the consumption of wildlife, or human contact with bats was responsible for the emergence of SARS-CoV-2. Others argue that a range of anthropogenic environmental degradations have played a vital role in the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and other zoonoses. In this opinion piece, I argue that these divergent viewpoints stem, in part, from different foundational conceptual frameworks - biomedical individualist and eco-social frameworks, respectively. Based on the fact that the eco-social framework provides a more complete account of the different types of causal factors underpinning the emergence of zoonoses, I propose that the COVID-19 pandemic provides an additional reason for the health sciences to ground its theory of health and disease in an eco-social conceptual framework.

A Case of Steroid-Responsive, COVID-19 Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome Following the Use of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor.

We present a case report of a 54-year-old male with metastasized nasopharyngeal carcinoma presenting to the hospital with dyspnea, anorexia and fever. Examination revealed chemotherapy-induced pancytopenia. The patient tested positive for SARSCoV-2, but respiratory complications were mild. The patient was treated with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) leading to amelioration of the neutropenia. However, severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) occurred, prompting the diagnosis of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS). GCSF is currently investigated as additional therapy in ARDS, but this case report emphasizes that risks and benefits must be carefully assessed. To our knowledge, this is the first case report of IRIS-induced ARDS in a COVID-19 patient.

COVID-19 Infection Fatality Rate Associated with Incidence-A Population-Level Analysis of 19 Spanish Autonomous Communities.

Previous studies have found large variations in the COVID-19 infection fatality rate (IFR). This study hypothesized that IFR would be influenced by COVID-19 epidemic intensity. We tested the association between epidemic intensity and IFR using serological results from a recent large SARS-CoV-2 serosurvey (N = 60,983) in 19 Spanish regions. The infection fatality rate for Spain as a whole was 1.15% and varied between 0.13% and 3.25% in the regions (median 1.07%, IQR 0.69-1.32%). The IFR by region was positively associated with SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence (rho = 0.54; p = 0.0162), cases/100,000 (rho = 0.75; p = 0.002), hospitalizations/100,000 (rho = 0.78; p = 0.0001), mortality/100,000 (rho = 0.77; p = 0.0001) and case fatality rate (rho = 0.49; p = 0.0327). These results suggest that the SARS-CoV-2 IFR is not fixed. The Spanish regions with more rapid and extensive spread of SARS-CoV-2 had higher IFRs. These findings are compatible with the theory that slowing the spread of COVID-19 down reduces the IFR and case fatality rate via preventing hospitals from being overrun, and thus allowing better and lifesaving care.