ArticleAIDS and behavior2026
Impact of Post-exposure Prophylaxis on Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Initiation Among Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Nested Case-control Study.
Article in AIDS and behavior, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is considered a gate way to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), prospective evidence remains limited. This study aimed to investigate the association between PEP experience and subsequent PrEP initiation. A nested case-control study was conducted within a prospective cohort of men who have sex with men (MSM) in Qingdao, China. Cases were participants newly initiating PrEP, matched to four controls selected from participants who were at risk of initiating PrEP at the exact time the case occurred. The primary exposure was self-reported baseline PEP use, classified as never, ever, or recent use. Supplementary analyses examined PEP use at the visit immediately preceding PrEP initiation. A dichotomous exposure categorization grouping strategy was also applied across the above analysis (combining ever and recent users). Conditional Logistic regression estimated associations between PEP and PrEP initiation. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess the potential effect modification. A total of 59 cases and 234 matched controls were included. Baseline PEP experience was not significantly associated with subsequent PrEP initiation (ever use: aOR = 1.79, 95%CI: 0.86-3.69, P = 0.117; recent use: aOR = 1.52, 95%CI: 0.46-4.99, P = 0.488). This lack of a significant association persisted when ever and recent PEP users were combined into a single "prior use" category (aOR = 1.72, 95%CI: 0.88-3.35, P = 0.110). However, subgroup analyses showed that among participants who report recent recreational drug use, those with a history of PEP use were more likely to initiate PrEP (aOR = 2.25, 95%CI: 1.09-4.64, P = 0.029). These findings suggest that to effectively leverage PEP encounters as a gateway to sustained prevention, health systems should prioritize and intensify linkage interventions for high-risk groups identified during the PEP consultation, particularly individuals who use substances. Transforming PEP encounters into opportunities for tailored intervention can strengthen the HIV prevention cascade for those most in need.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42332170What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.