Frame me if you must: PrEP framing and the impact on adherence to HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis
Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

UC San Diego

UC San Diego Previously Published Works bannerUC San Diego

Frame me if you must: PrEP framing and the impact on adherence to HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis

Abstract

Abstract: Background: “PrEP whore” has been used both as a pejorative by PrEP opponents in the gay community and, reactively, by PrEP advocates as a method to reclaim the label from stigmatization and “slut-shaming.” The actual prevalence and impact of such PrEP-directed stigma on adherence have been insufficiently studied. Methods: CCTG 595 was a randomized controlled PrEP demonstration project in 398 HIV-uninfected MSM and transwomen. Intracellular tenofovir-diphosphate (TFV-DP) levels at weeks 12 and 48 were used as a continuous measure of adherence. At study visits, participants were asked to describe how they perceived others’ reactions to them being on PrEP. These perceptions were categorized a priori as either “positively framed,” “negatively framed,” or both. We used Wilcoxon rank-sum to determine the association between positive and negative framing and TFV-DP levels at weeks 12 and 48. Results: By week 4, 29% of participants reported perceiving positive reactions from members of their social groups, 5% negative, and 6% both. Reporting decreased over 48 weeks, but positive reactions were consistently reported more than negative. At week 12, no differences in mean TFV-DP levels were observed in participants with positively-framed reactions compared with those reporting no outcome or only negatively-framed (1338 [IQR, 1036-1609] vs. 1281 [946-1489] fmol/punch, P = 0.17). Additionally, no differences were observed in those with negative reactions vs. those without (1209 [977–1427] vs. 1303 [964–1545], P = 0.58). At week 48, mean TFV-DP levels trended toward being higher among those that report any reaction, regardless if positive (1335 [909–1665] vs. 1179 [841–1455], P = 0.09) or negative (1377 [1054–1603] vs. 1192 [838–1486], P = 0.10) than those reporting no reaction. At week 48, 46% of participants reported experiencing some form of PrEP-directed judgment, 23% reported being called “PrEP whore,” and 21% avoiding disclosing PrEP use. Conclusion: Over 48 weeks, nearly half of participants reported some form of judgment or stigmatization as a consequence of PrEP use. However, individuals more frequently perceived positively framed reactions to being on PrEP than negative. Importantly, long-term PrEP adherence does not appear to suffer as a result of negative PrEP framing. Disclosures: All authors: No reported disclosures.

Many UC-authored scholarly publications are freely available on this site because of the UC's open access policies. Let us know how this access is important for you.

Main Content
For improved accessibility of PDF content, download the file to your device.
Current View