More than a decade after the first efficacy evidence for oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) was reported, PrEP uptake globally has been inadequate and global HIV prevention targets have been missed. Access to PrEP is still highly concentrated in a fairly small number of countries and, even within countries with widespread PrEP access, inequalities have emerged. More ambitious, high-priority global targets for PrEP uptake are required and could accelerate the HIV prevention response in a similar way to the success of the 90-90-90 testing and treatment targets. Health systems must be PrEP-friendly and allow PrEP to be prescribed in settings already attended by large numbers of HIV-negative individuals who are at risk. Several models have been advanced for the greater demedicalisation of PrEP. Individual-level barriers to PrEP uptake and persistence have been characterised, such as low awareness, low willingness to use PrEP, and the gap between self-perceived and actual HIV risk. Overcoming these barriers will require further efforts to understand and address them first. New PrEP modalities are emerging; as more options become available, we need to develop a greater understanding of the long-term patterns of PrEP use in different populations and to develop models of such use that can accommodate people alternating through periods of use and non-use, as well as switching between dosing regimens or modalities as they become available. Scaling up PrEP is crucial to achieving the UNAIDS prevention targets for 2030. Simply getting more people onto PrEP cannot be the only goal: the big-picture definition of success for PrEP programmes must be their impact on the HIV epidemic.

Background: Many gay and bisexual men (GBM) experience HIV anxiety, particularly around condomless anal intercourse. HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective HIV prevention strategy that may reduce HIV anxiety among GBM. Methods: The Following Lives Undergoing Change (Flux) Study is a national, online, open-prospective observational study of licit and illicit drug use among GBM in Australia. In 2018, participants responded to newly included items regarding anxiety about HIV transmission. Stratifying GBM as high or low risk as determined by the Australian PrEP Guidelines, we assess whether PrEP use is associated with lower levels of HIV anxiety. Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare factors associated with PrEP use among GBM at high risk (PrEP-eligible) and low risk (PrEP-ineligible) of HIV infection. Results are reported as adjusted odds ratios and corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Results: Among 1547 men, the mean age was 37.1 years (SD 13.1). Men aged 25 years or younger had higher HIV anxiety scores than older men. Among PrEP-eligible men, men who use PrEP reported lower levels of HIV anxiety (adjusted odds ratio = 0.92; 95% confidence interval = 0.87 to 0.99; P < 0.001). No differences were observed on HIV anxiety among PrEP-ineligible men. Conclusions: Among PrEP-eligible men, PrEP use was independently associated with lower levels of HIV anxiety. In addition to avoiding HIV infection, PrEP use may help reduce anxiety among men at risk of HIV. This feature of PrEP could be promoted as part of demand creation initiatives to increase PrEP uptake.

Background: HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a highly effective biomedical HIV prevention strategy, yet some gay and bisexual men (GBM) who are eligible to access PrEP are not using it. We report the incidence of PrEP uptake, factors predicting its initiation, and identify characteristics associated with nonuptake of PrEP among Australian GBM who meet the eligibility criteria. Methods: The Following Lives Undergoing Change (Flux) Study is a national, online, prospective observational study among GBM focusing on licit and illicit drug use. Participants (N = 1257) responded to baseline and 6-monthly follow-up questionnaires. Incidence per 100 person-years and incidence rate ratios of PrEP initiation are presented. Multivariate Poisson regression was used to examine associations with PrEP initiation and logistic regression to examine associations with nonuptake of PrEP among eligible GBM. Results: Among GBM who met the eligibility criteria, 69.8% of men did not commence PrEP. Factors independently associated with nonuptake of PrEP were younger age, living in an Australian state without a PrEP trial, lower social engagement with other gay men, less use of illicit party drugs or use of illicit party drugs for sex, and less likely to have engaged in HIV sexual risk behaviors such as group sex or any condomless anal intercourse. Conclusions: Despite meeting formal eligibility criteria for PrEP, men who were relatively less sexually active or less socially connected were less likely to initiate PrEP. Men who did not initiate PrEP may assess their risk as insufficient relative to others to warrant using PrEP because they engaged in less frequent “risky” behaviors.