Skip to main content
International Journal of Health Sciences logoLink to International Journal of Health Sciences
editorial
. 2018 Jan-Feb;12(1):1–3.

Male circumcision and human immunodeficiency virus infection: An update on randomized controlled trials and molecular evidences

Zafar Rasheed 1,
PMCID: PMC5870312  PMID: 29623010

Male circumcision is one of the common and oldest surgical modalities performed worldwide for social, cultural, and medicals reasons. It is now well documented that 37-39% of men globally are circumcised.[1] The frequency of male circumcision was markedly increased in all over the world since three consecutive randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have concluded that male circumcision decreases the risk of acquiring human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1 or HIV) infection by 50–60% in men.[2-4] These trails findings were fully supported by a large number of survey-based studies in United States and Africa.[5,6] In agreement with these views, the World Health Organization (WHO) and Joint United Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) together have issued a formal recommendation on voluntary implementation of male circumcision for HIV prevention.[7] In support of these, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) took a similar step in favor of male circumcision for newborns,[8] and moreover, this has also been supported by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.[6,8] Male circumcision has now become a valuable component for HIV prevention policy in Sub-Saharan Africa, with almost 15 million circumcisions performed from 2007 to 2016.[9,10] Furthermore, UNAIDS has already set a target that 90% of men aged between 15 and 29 years should be circumcised in Africa by 2021 with a total of 27 million more circumcision on a voluntary basis.[9,11] Although the WHO and UNAIDS proposed reaching 80% of male circumcision coverage in HIV widespread countries, but in developed countries, current rates declined far behind the target and circumcision remains continues to be a controversial topic.[6,12-14] In spite of these, AAP has recognized the importance of male circumcision and has fully supported the procedure for insurance coverage.[6,8] According to the data published so far on RCTs, it is quite clear that male circumcision decreases female-to-male HIV-1 risk but data on circumcised male-to-female HIV-1 transmission are still conflicting.[15] One randomized trial performed in Rakai, Uganda, in 2011 on male-to-female HIV transmission showed that male circumcision does not reduce the HIV infection in female partners, and female partners are more prone when intercourse with HIV-infected circumcised men.[15] Grung et al. have recently reviewed this aspect closely and they pointed out that the increased risk of HIV in females could be due to early sex after male circumcision.[9] In addition, Baeten et al. performed a well- designed study on male-to-female HIV-1 transmission on 1096 HIV-1-serodiscordant couples, in which 34% were circumcised men and were HIV-1 infected. They observed that male circumcision decreases transmission in their female partners.[16] This was also observed by many other investigators that female partners with circumcised men were found to have a much lower risk of HIV transmission as compared to those females with uncircumcised men.[17-20] Thus, there are substantial RCT-based evidence that male circumcision reduces female-to-male or male-to-female HIV transmission.[5,6,17] However, the role of male circumcision for the reduction of HIV transmission among homosexual men is still not clear and highly controversial.[4,5,17] A study by Buchbinder et al. performed in six cities of the United States and found that the uncircumcised men who have sex with men were associated with twice the risk of HIV infection as compared to those with circumcised men.[21] Similar observations have also been previously reported by Kreiss and Hopkins.[22] However, Grulich et al., in Australia, found no correlation between circumcision and HIV acquisition among homosexual men.[23] Similar results have also been reported by Templeton et al.[24] Furthermore, a meta-analysis by Millett et al. also showed no association between circumcision and HIV acquisition in homosexual men.[25] These data indicate that male circumcision may work as a safeguard against vaginal insertion but not against anal intercourse,[6] and therefore, circumcised men involving sexual intercourse in both forms may have partial protection.

It is now clear that male circumcision reduces the rate of heterosexual HIV-1 transmission but the molecular evidence by which it protects remain poorly understood and controversial. Recently, Prodger and Kaul have somewhat described the biological basis of how it reduces HIV susceptibility.[26] They noticed that activation of immune system in foreskin tissues next to subpreputial space promotes HIV in uncircumcised men via epithelial barrier distraction increased maturation of dendritic cells, neutrophils activation/recruitment, and vulnerable CD4 T-cell subsets.[26] In addition, they also determined the role of genital microbiome as an inducer of this immune activation.[26] Benefits of male circumcision against HIV infection have also been proved anatomically by many investigators on the basis of keratinization of the foreskin.[17,27-30] It is now well documented that keratinization in the inner foreskin is less as compared to outer foreskin and this makes uncircumcised men more susceptible to HIV infection.[27-30] Moreover, Hussain and Lehner reported Langerhans’ cells are significantly more in the mucosal surface of the foreskin,[31] and again, this was confirmed by Petterson et al. suggesting that circumcision decreases HIV infection by reducing HIV-1 target cells.[30] Furthermore, a study on in vivo macaque model also noticed that the glans epithelia and inner foreskin are important sites for HIV acquisition in uncircumcised men.[27] However, many other reports have shown that keratin thickness is same in the inner and outer foreskin of healthy men,[32,33] therefore biological basis on keratin layers alone is not suitable to explain the fact why circumcised men are at lower risk of HIV infection. In support of male circumcision, Fahrbach et al. reported a novel aspect that Langerhans cells in the inner foreskin (not in outer) increase their cellular protein expression in the response of external stimuli, suggesting that HIV target cells in the inner foreskin interact with external factors.[34] This enhanced response of inner foreskin might explain the underlying biology of how male circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection. Furthermore, Price et al. described another mechanism on the basis of penile microbiota, and they found that circumcision makes significant changes in the overall microbiota and with significant reduction in anaerobic bacterial content.[35] These findings indicating that anoxic surroundings of the subpreputial space promote activation of Langerhans cells to present HIV to CD4 cells, and thus, the reduction of anaerobic bacteria after circumcision provides protection against HIV infection.[35] In addition, O’Farrell et al. observed that circumcised men have significantly lower rates of penile wetness than uncircumcised men, which may also be a factor for reducing the risk of HIV acquisition.[36] Another excellent explanation was given by Kigozi et al. They calculated the total surface area of the foreskin in HIV-infected men and also in uninfected men and found that mean surface area of the foreskin was significantly more in HIV-infected men as compared to uninfected men.[37] Thus, removal of the foreskin by circumcision reduces HIV surgical infection. In short, it is now clear that male circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection and the pathophysiology behind it seems to be multifactorial, mainly relying on cellular and anatomical alterations. Evidences for the benefits of male circumcision against the HIV-1 infection are now very supportive and additional research is only likely to confirm what is already known through RCTs and molecular findings.

References

  • 1.Morris BJ, Wamai RG, Henebeng EB, Tobian AA, Klausner JD, Banerjee J, et al. Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision. Popul Health Metr. 2016;14:4. doi: 10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Gray RH, Kigozi G, Serwadda D, Makumbi F, Watya S, Nalugoda F, et al. Male circumcision for HIV prevention in men in Rakai, Uganda: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2007;369:657–66. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60313-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Bailey RC, Moses S, Parker CB, Agot K, Maclean I, Krieger JN, et al. Male circumcision for HIV prevention in young men in Kisumu, Kenya: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2007;369:643–56. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60312-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Auvert B, Taljaard D, Lagarde E, Sobngwi-Tambekou J, Sitta R, Puren A, et al. Randomized, controlled intervention trial of male circumcision for reduction of HIV infection risk: The ANRS 1265 trial. PLoS Med. 2005;2:e298. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020298. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Tobian AA, Gray RH. The medical benefits of male circumcision. J Am Med Assoc. 2011;306:1479–80. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.1431. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Tobian AA, Kacker S, Quinn TC. Male circumcision: A globally relevant but under-utilized method for the prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. Annu Rev Med. 2014;65:293–306. doi: 10.1146/annurev-med-092412-090539. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.WHO/UNAIDS. Neonatal and Child Male Circumcision: A Global Review. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010. Available from: http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/neonatal_mc/en . [Google Scholar]
  • 8.American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force on Circumcision. Male circumcision. Pediatrics. 2012;130:e756–85. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Grund JM, Bryant TS, Jackson I, Curran K, Bock N, Toledo C, et al. Association between male circumcision and women’s biomedical health outcomes: A systematic review. Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5:e1113–22. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30369-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.WHO. Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in 14 Priority Countries in Eastern and Southern Africa. 2017. [Last accessed on 2017 Sept 13]. Available from: http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/vmmc-progress-brief-2017/en .
  • 11.UNAIDS. On the Fast-Track to End AIDS: UNAIDS 2016-2021. Strategy. Geneva: The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS; 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Beal JA. Neonatal male circumcision: Still a controversy. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2017;42:233. doi: 10.1097/NMC.0000000000000352. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Di Pietro ML, Teleman AA, Di Pietro ML, Poscia A, González-Melado FJ, Panocchia N, et al. Preventive newborn male circumcision: What is the child’s best interest? Cuad Bioet. 2017;28:303–16. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Norton AT. Foreskin and the molecular politics of risk. Soc Stud Sci. 2017;47:655–80. doi: 10.1177/0306312717707360. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Wawer MJ, Tobian AA, Kigozi G, Kong X, Gravitt PE, Serwadda D, et al. Effect of circumcision of HIV-negative men on transmission of human papillomavirus to HIV-negative women: A randomised trial in Rakai, Uganda. Lancet. 2011;377:209–18. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61967-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Baeten JM, Donnell D, Kapiga SH, Ronald A, John-Stewart G, Inambao M, et al. Male circumcision and risk of male-to-female HIV-1 transmission: A multinational prospective study in African HIV-1-serodiscordant couples. AIDS. 2010;24:737–44. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e32833616e0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Hayashi Y, Kohri K. Circumcision related to urinary tract infections, sexually transmitted infections, human immunodeficiency virus infections, and penile and cervical cancer. Int J Urol. 2013;20:769–75. doi: 10.1111/iju.12154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Malamba SS, Mermin JH, Bunnell R, Mubangizi J, Kalule J, Marum E, et al. Couples at risk: HIV-1 concordance and discordance among sexual partners receiving voluntary counseling and testing in Uganda. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2005;39:576–80. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Gray RH, Kiwanuka N, Quinn TC, Sewankambo NK, Serwadda D, Mangen FW, et al. Male circumcision and HIV acquisition and transmission: Cohort studies in Rakai, Uganda. Rakai project team. AIDS. 2000;14:2371–81. doi: 10.1097/00002030-200010200-00019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Quinn TC, Wawer MJ, Sewankambo N, Serwadda D, Li C, Wabwire-Mangen F, et al. Viral load and heterosexual transmission of human immunodeficiency virus Type 1. Rakai project study group. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:921–9. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200003303421303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Buchbinder SP, Vittinghoff E, Heagerty PJ, Celum CL, Seage GR, 3rd, Judson FN, et al. Sexual risk, nitrite inhalant use, and lack of circumcision associated with HIV seroconversion in men who have sex with men in the United States. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2005;39:82–9. doi: 10.1097/01.qai.0000134740.41585.f4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Kreiss JK, Hopkins SG. The association between circumcision status and human immunodeficiency virus infection among homosexual men. J Infect Dis. 1998;168:1404–8. doi: 10.1093/infdis/168.6.1404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Grulich AE, Hendry O, Clark E, Kippax S, Kaldor JM. Circumcision and male-to-male sexual transmission of HIV. AIDS. 2001;15:1188–9. doi: 10.1097/00002030-200106150-00020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Templeton DJ, Jin F, Prestage GP, Donovan B, Imrie JC, Kippax SC, et al. Circumcision and risk of sexually transmissible infections in a community-based cohort of HIV-negative homosexual men in Sydney, Australia. J Infect Dis. 2009;200:1813–9. doi: 10.1086/648376. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Millett GA, Flores SA, Marks G, Reed JB, Herbst JH. Circumcision status and risk of HIV and sexually transmitted infections among men who have sex with men: A meta-analysis. J Am Med Assoc. 2008;300:1674–84. doi: 10.1001/jama.300.14.1674. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Prodger JL, Kaul R. The biology of how circumcision reduces HIV susceptibility: Broader implications for the prevention field. AIDS Res Ther. 2017;14:49. doi: 10.1186/s12981-017-0167-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Dinh MH, Anderson MR, McRaven MD, Cianci GC, McCoombe SG, Kelley ZL, et al. Visualization of HIV-1 interactions with penile and foreskin epithelia: Clues for female-to-male HIV transmission. PLoS Pathog. 2015;11:e1004729. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1004729. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Morris BJ, Wamai RG. Biological basis for the protective effect conferred by male circumcision against HIV infection. Int J STD AIDS. 2012;23:153–9. doi: 10.1258/ijsa.2011.011228. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.McCoombe SG, Short RV. Potential HIV-1 target cells in the human penis. AIDS. 2006;20:1491–5. doi: 10.1097/01.aids.0000237364.11123.98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Patterson BK, Landay A, Siegel JN, Flener Z, Pessis D, Chaviano A, et al. Susceptibility to human immunodeficiency virus-1 infection of human foreskin and cervical tissue grown in explant culture. Am J Pathol. 2002;161:867–73. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)64247-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Hussain LA, Lehner T. Comparative investigation of Langerhans’cells and potential receptors for HIV in oral, genitourinary and rectal epithelia. Immunology. 1995;85:475–84. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Dinh MH, Hirbod T, Kigozi G, Okocha EA, Cianci GC, Kong X, et al. No difference in keratin thickness between inner and outer foreskins from elective male circumcisions in Rakai, Uganda. PLoS One. 2012;7:e41271. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0041271. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Dinh MH, McRaven MD, Kelley Z, Penugonda S, Hope TJ. Keratinization of the adult male foreskin and implications for male circumcision. AIDS. 2010;24:899–906. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e3283367779. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Fahrbach KM, Barry SM, Anderson MR, Hope TJ. Enhanced cellular responses and environmental sampling within inner foreskin explants: Implications for the foreskin’s role in HIV transmission. Mucosal Immunol. 2010;3:410–8. doi: 10.1038/mi.2010.18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Price LB, Liu CM, Johnson KE, Aziz M, Lau MK, Bowers J, et al. Association between HIV and subpreputial penile wetness in uncircumcised men in South Africa. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006;43:69–77. doi: 10.1097/01.qai.0000225014.61192.98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.O’Farrell N, Morison L, Moodley P, Pillay K, Vanmali T, Quigley M, et al. Association between HIV and subpreputial penile wetness in uncircumcised men in South Africa. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006;43:69–77. doi: 10.1097/01.qai.0000225014.61192.98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Kigozi G, Wawer M, Ssettuba A, Kagaayi J, Nalugoda F, Watya S, et al. Foreskin surface area and HIV acquisition in Rakai, Uganda (size matters) AIDS. 2009;23:2209–13. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e328330eda8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Journal of Health Sciences are provided here courtesy of Qassim University

RESOURCES