Utility of a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) label indication for condoms for anal sex.

Condoms are highly effective for HIV prevention, yet are not currently indicated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for anal sex. We surveyed a national sample of men who have sex with men to assess whether FDA label indication could affect anticipated condom use, and to determine levels of perceived condom failure for anal sex. We found that 69% of respondents anticipated that a label indication change would increase their likelihood of condom use. Median perceived failure was 15%. We anticipate that these results may aid the FDA in developing standards for a label indication for anal sex.

Validation of an Event-Level, Male Sexual Pleasure Scale (EMSEXpleasure) Among Condom-Using Men in the U.S.

Sexual pleasure is a key determinant of condom use. We developed and validated a male, event-level sexual pleasure scale (EMSEXpleasure) among a sample of condom-using men in the U.S. in order to facilitate improved measurement of sexual pleasure. Based on an expert panel process, a 12-item scale was developed. An online sample of 169 men who have sex with men and 162 men who have sex with women were recruited. Factor analysis yielded a two-factor solution that matched domains identified a priori by the expert panel, general pleasure and condom-specific pleasure, indicating internal validity of the instrument. One item was deleted from the scale due to poor validity performance. The overall EMSEXpleasure scale, and each subscale, had high (> 0.8) Cronbach's alpha coefficients, indicating internal reliability. The scale demonstrated convergent validity, with theoretically related constructs associated both with individual scale items and with scale totals. Overall relationship quality (b 3.0, 95% CI 2.0, 4.0), sexual relationship quality (b 2.9, 95% CI 2.0, 4.0), foreplay quality (b 7.5, 95% CI 2, 13), positive feelings about condoms (b 18.8, 95% CI 15, 23), and erection problems while using condoms (b - 17.9, 95% CI - 22, - 14) were associated with the EMSEXpleasure scale in expected directions. The validated EMSEXpleasure event-level scale may be advantageous for future assessments of the ephemeral experience of sexual pleasure, including clinical trials of condoms and other interventions, because it can be used immediately after sex, potentially limiting recall error.

Double-Blind, Single-Center, Randomized Three-Way Crossover Trial of Fitted, Thin, and Standard Condoms for Vaginal and Anal Sex: C-PLEASURE Study Protocol and Baseline Data.

BACKGROUND: Male condoms are underused despite their ability to prevent transmission of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. The perception of decreased sexual pleasure and poor condom fit are major contributors to condom nonuse. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare event-level performance and pleasure using fitted, thin, and standard condoms among men who have sex with men (MSM) and men who have sex with women (MSW). We also sought to assess condom type preference. We present the study design and enrollment data from the trial. METHODS: This study recruited sexually active men aged 18 to 54 years in Atlanta, Georgia, United States. We enrolled 252 MSM and 252 MSW in a double-blind, 3-way randomized crossover trial with conditions of fitted, thin, and standard condoms. A permuted block randomization scheme was used to assign each participant to the sequence in which they received each type of study condom. After a baseline screening and enrollment visit, randomized participants were followed for at least 6 and up to 12 weeks depending on their use of study condoms in each 2-week period between scheduled, in-person study visits. Participants were instructed to complete mobile-optimized coital logs as soon as possible after using condoms for anal or vaginal sex acts. The logs collected event-level pleasure and performance measures for the study condoms as well as other relevant data. A questionnaire was administered at the final study visit to assess overall study condom preference. RESULTS: The study enrolled 252 MSM and 252 MSW, a total of 504 participants. MSM and MSW study arms were similar for a number of key traits including race and ethnicity, marital status, self-rated condom experience, and recent experience of condom failure. Men in the MSM arm were older, however, and fewer MSM were students. The majority of participants in both arms rated themselves as very experienced with using condoms, and the majority had used condoms recently. Over one-third of participants in each arm reported experiencing condom failure in the last 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first condom trial to compare the performance of standard, thin, and fitted condoms and to use pleasure and preference as primary outcomes. Given the disparate impact of HIV on MSM, equal enrollment of MSM and MSW was a key feature of this study. Trial results may inform an FDA label indication for anal sex and provide new information regarding the relative performance of different types of condoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02753842; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02753842 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76RLTFyf0). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/12205.

Levels of clinical condom failure for anal sex: A randomized cross-over trial.

BACKGROUND: Men who have sex with men (MSM) face a 28-fold higher risk of HIV acquisition than men who have sex with women (MSW). Condoms are the most accessible prevention method, with billions produced annually. Due to potentially high clinical failure, international regulatory agencies do not approve condoms for anal sex. This trial sought to provide data regarding approval of condoms for anal sex. METHODS: We conducted a blinded, crossover randomized trial among MSM and MSW in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. Crossover conditions were standard condoms, thin condoms, and condoms fitted to each user's penile dimensions. The primary outcome was total clinical failure (slippage and/or breakage), assessed using an intention-to-treat analysis. A mixed methods model assessed differences in odds of failure. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02753842, and is completed. FINDINGS: We enrolled 252 MSM and 252 MSW between May 19, 2016 and May 2, 2017. Participants reported a total of 4884 anal or vaginal sex acts using study-provided condoms. For all crossover conditions, clinical failure was lower for anal sex (0•7%, 16/2351) than for vaginal sex (1•9%, 48/2533), (odds ratio 0•40, 95% confidence interval 0•21, 0•75, p < â€¢001)00. There was no difference in odds of failure for anal sex acts between the different types of condoms. Due to study design, nearly all anal sex acts used condom-compatible lubricant (98•3%), yet only a minority of vaginal sex acts (41•6%) used lubricant. Sex acts for which lubricant was used had lower failure for both anal and vaginal sex, with no difference in odds of failure between them. INTERPRETATION: In the largest trial of effectiveness of condoms for anal sex to date, we found remarkably low levels of failure. Condoms should be approved by regulatory agencies for anal sex. Clinicians may recommend condoms as a highly efficacious HIV and STD prevention tool for anal sex. Differences between failure for anal and vaginal sex were likely due to differential use of lubricant. Condom promotion programs should consider providing additional lubricant for all condoms distributed.