Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 May 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2022 May 1;90(1):15–19. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002915

Transgender Women and PrEP Care: High PrEP Adherence in a Real-World Health Care Setting in New York City

Lila Starbuck 1, Sarit A Golub 1,2, Augustus Klein 1, Alexander B Harris 3, Amiyah Guerra 3, Christopher Rincon 1, Asa E Radix 3
PMCID: PMC8986585  NIHMSID: NIHMS1769931  PMID: 35013087

Abstract

Background:

Transgender women and trans feminine individuals (TGW/TFI) are a high priority population for the provision of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) care within the United States, but there is limited research that focuses specifically on PrEP adherence within this population.

Setting:

Observational study of patients prescribed PrEP at a community-based health center.

Methods:

We enrolled 100 TGW/TFI PrEP patients at a community health center during clinic visits. Adherence data were collected at three time points, using self-report surveys, patient interviews, and urine assays measuring tenofovir. Data were summarized descriptively.

Results:

The sample was diverse in age, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic characteristics. Participants demonstrated strong PrEP adherence; at least 80% of the sample reported 90% or greater adherence at each time point. Concordance between self-report and urine assay was high. Among patients who reported taking PrEP within the last 48 hours, 82%−92% had detectable urine tenofovir. However, many patients reported PrEP stop periods of 4 or more days (28%−39% per time point).

Conclusions:

Our data highlight TGW/TFI’s capacity to adhere to daily PrEP and sustain PrEP use over time. The concordance between patient self-report and urine TFV levels suggest that providers can trust patient reports of PrEP adherence behavior, and support the use of adherence conversations in clinical settings, without the need for point of care biological monitoring. Findings also underscore the importance of continued attention to drivers of PrEP stops at the patient, clinic, and systems levels and the development of strategies that support sustained PrEP use.

Keywords: HIV, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), implementation science, transgender women, transgender, medication adherence

Introduction

In the United States (US), transgender women and transfeminine individuals (TGW/TFI) experience disproportionate rates of HIV infection.13 HIV prevalence among TGW/TFI is estimated at 14.1% for laboratory confirmed tests, and 21% for self-reported HIV status, with the highest prevalence found among African American TGW.2 HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) presents an opportunity to address this disparity, however, there is a considerable lack of research on PrEP with this population.48 Existing research has predominantly focused on documenting facilitators and barriers to PrEP uptake among TGW/TFI, including PrEP awareness, attitudes, acceptability and eligibility.924 Few studies in the US have included a substantial sample of TGW/TFI on PrEP,8,10 and none have closely examined dynamics over time of real-world PrEP use (i.e., in absence of research incentive or intervention). As such, there has been little investigation of PrEP adherence patterns among TGW/TFI in the US.6,7,2528 There is an urgent need to understand patterns of PrEP adherence among TGW/TFI in real world clinical settings. These data would contribute to our ability to ensure that this high-priority population receives access both to PrEP medication and to the necessary supports to promote PrEP efficacy.

In this brief report, we present data on PrEP adherence among a cohort of TGW/TFI receiving PrEP as part of their comprehensive health care at a Federally Qualified Health Center. We compared biological and self-report adherence measures and examined patterns of continuous or interrupted PrEP adherence over time.

Methods

Participants and Procedures

Data originate from FIRED UP, an observational cohort study of TGW/TFI patients at a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) serving lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) communities in New York City. The study was designed to understand and improve PrEP implementation efforts with TGW/TFI in a real-world setting. Data were collected from November 2018 to May 2020. Study staff embedded within the health center identified eligible patients with upcoming healthcare appointments, and conducted screening, informed consent, and enrollment procedures at appointments. Eligibility criteria included 18 years of age or older, negative HIV status, sex recorded at birth of ‘male,’ and gender identity of woman, transgender woman, trans feminine, non-binary, two-spirit, or gender non-conforming.

The present analysis includes 100 TGW/TFI who were PrEP patients at the clinic and had been prescribed once daily tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. The majority of the sample (54%) were under 30 years of age, 50% reported a Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity, 22% were White non-Hispanic, 20% were Black non-Hispanic, and 8% reported other race and non-Hispanic. Most participants identified as women or transgender women (88%). More than half reported having less than a 4-year college degree (56%), 72% reported earning < $25,000 a year, 89% reported having health insurance (67% Medicaid/Medicare; 22% private insurance), and 18% reported current unstable housing or homelessness.

Measures and Data Analysis

Study data were collected at three time points, T1 (enrollment), T2 (approximately 3 months after enrollment), and T3 (approximately 6 months after enrollment), with date-range flexibility to accommodate patient availability and scheduled clinic visits.

Online surveys were completed prior to or at each study visit. These included two questions from a self-report measure of medication adherence29: “In the last 30 days, on how many days did you miss your PrEP pill?” and “In the last 30 days, how often did you take your PrEP medication exactly as prescribed by your doctor?” (6-point Likert-type scale, ranging from “Never” to “Always”). In these analyses, the second item was dichotomized into Always/Almost Always versus Usually/Sometimes/Rarely/Never.

Patient interviews occurred immediately before or after patients’ clinic visits, and mirrored standard clinical PrEP adherence conversations. Research staff asked participants when they had taken their most recent PrEP pill and whether or not they had stopped taking PrEP for four or more consecutive days in the past three months. Those who reported four or more consecutive days of missed pills were defined as having a “PrEP stop,” based on data suggesting that HIV protection is reduced once pill-taking drops below four pills in a given 7-day period.30,31 Those who did not were defined as having “continuous PrEP adherence” during that three-month period. This question was also asked on the online survey. Participants who reported a PrEP stop were asked whether or not they had resumed taking PrEP (coded as a “restart”).

Urine samples were collected from participants who reported having taken PrEP within the 7 days preceding their follow up study visit. Samples were analyzed using a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) urine assay with high sensitivity and specificity for tenofovir, performed by a third-party laboratory.32 This assay has been validated, demonstrating high sensitivity and positive predictive value when compared to dried blood spots (DBS), as well as greater sensitivity than plasma-based measures.3335 It differentiates between high levels of urine TFV (>1000 ng/mL), lower levels of urine TFV (10–1000 ng/mL), and the absence of detectable levels (<10 ng/mL). High levels indicate having taken a pill in the last 7 days, and are a probable indicator for last pill within the last 2–3 days.33,36 Urine specimen collection is more commonplace than DBS in clinical care, and also tends to be more widely acceptable to patients.40 These factors increase study procedure generalizability to other community-based settings.

Urine TFV results are presented for participants who reported being on PrEP at the study visit and provided a urine sample with valid assay results (T2, n = 64; T3, n = 55). Additional participants had follow up visits at these time points, but their urine TFV data are not included in the analysis, either because they reported being off PrEP at the time of their visit (T2, n = 14; T3, n = 13), or due to specimen processing issues (T2, n = 2; T3, n = 5).

Participants received $40 for T1 and T2 surveys, each, and $60 for the T3 survey, in cash or online gift card, based on participant preference. Participants did not receive compensation for clinic visits and were not incentivized to use PrEP. Follow up visit data were entered into a secure HIPAA-compliant online REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) database hosted by the City University of New York (CUNY).41,42 Ethical approval was obtained from the CUNY Institutional Review Board.

Results

Although all participants in the sample were receiving PrEP prescriptions from the health center at enrollment, only 87% reported being on PrEP at the time of their T1 survey. The remaining 13% had temporarily stopped PrEP for a variety of reasons (e.g., unstable housing, insurance gap, missed their most recent refill appointment), and planned to restart PrEP. Table 1 presents self-reported adherence data from surveys and patient interviews. Between 78% and 82% reported taking PrEP “always/almost always” as prescribed at each time point, and between 80% and 82% reported missing three or fewer pills (90% or greater adherence) in the past 30 days. Regarding most recent dosage, 77% of patients reported taking a PrEP pill in the last 48 hours at T2, and 73% of participants reported this at T3.

Table 1.

Self-Reported PrEP Adherence Measures

N % % N %
PrEP Use in the Last 30 Days 1 T1 T2 T3
Total with data, per time point 100 - 89 - 81 -
 On PrEP at Survey Date 87 87% 76 85% 68 84%
  Takes PrEP as prescribed during past 30 days
   Always or almost always 68 78% 62 82% 56 82%
   Usually or less often 19 22% 14 18% 12 18%
  Number of missed pills in past 30 days
   0 missed pills (100% adherence) 38 44% 27 36% 23 34%
   1–3 missed pills (90–99% adherence) 32 37% 35 46% 29 43%
   4–6 missed pills (80–89% adherence) 9 10% 9 12% 5 7%
   7 or more missed pills (<80% adherence) 8 9% 5 7% 11 16%
Most Recent Pill Taken 2
Total with data, per time point - - 81 - 73 -
 Took pill within last 48 hours - - 62 77% 53 73%
PrEP Stop and Restart Patterns, Last 3 Months 2
Total with data, per time point - - 72 - 72 -
 Continuous PrEP adherence, no stops - - 53 72% 44 61%
 Stopped/off PrEP and restarted - - 12 16% 15 21%
 Stopped/off PrEP, no restart - - 6 8% 12 17%
 Multiple PrEP stops - - 3 4% 1 1%
Continuous PrEP Adherence, Entire Study 1 T1 through T3
Total with data at all three time points 77 -
 Continuous adherence over all 3 three-month periods 34 44%
 Continuous adherence for 2 periods only 23 30%
 Continuous adherence 1 period only 12 16%
 PrEP stops in all 3 periods 8 10%
1

Survey data,

2

Patient interview data

At T2 patient interviews, 72% of patients reported continuous adherence in the prior three months, and 61% reported continuous adherence at T3. Of those who reported a PrEP stop at the T2 assessment (n = 21, 28% of the sample), 57% restarted and stayed on PrEP, 29% did not restart, and 14% reported multiple PrEP stops. At T3, 39% of the sample reported a stop (n = 28), of whom 54% restarted PrEP, 43% did not, and 4% reported multiple PrEP stops. We examined overall 9-month PrEP coverage, limiting the analysis to participants with survey data at all 3 time points (n = 77). Forty-four percent of participants reported continuous PrEP adherence over all three 3-month periods.

In Table 2, we report urine TFV concentrations overall and stratified by self-reported adherence. TFV was detected among 86% of valid samples at T2 and among 76% at T3, with 78% and 73% of samples indicating >1000 ng/ml, respectively. The results display a high degree of concordance between self-report and urine TFV detection level. Among participants who said they had taken PrEP within the last 48 hours during their patient interview, 92% and 82% (at T2 and T3, respectively) had TFV detected in their urine, and the majority (83% at T2 and 80% at T3) had a high concentration of TFV detected (>1000 ng/mL). Among participants who said that they “always or almost always” took PrEP as prescribed on their self-report survey, 78% and 83% had a high concentration of TFV detected, at T2 and T3 respectively.

Table 2.

Urine TFV Concentration Among Patients On PrEP1

T2 T3
N % N %
Total Sample 64 - 55 -
  TFV Detected 55 86% 42 76%
   >1000 ng/mL 50 78% 40 73%
   10–1000 ng/nL 5 8% 2 4%
  TFV Not Detected (<10 ng/mL) 9 14% 13 24%
Patient Interview: Self-Reported Last Pill 2
 Took pill within last 48 hours 59 - 49 -
  TFV Detected 54 92% 40 82%
   >1000 ng/mL 49 83% 39 80%
   10–1000 ng/nL 5 8% 1 2%
  TFV Not Detected (<10 ng/mL) 5 8% 9 18%
Online Survey: Takes PrEP As Prescribed (past 30 days) 3
 Always or Almost Always 55 - 41 -
  TFV Detected 46 84% 34 83%
   >1000 ng/mL 43 78% 34 83%
   10–1000 ng/nL 3 5% 0 0%
  TFV Not Detected (<10 ng/mL) 9 16% 7 17%
 Usually or less often 9 - 12 -
  TFV Detected 9 100% 7 58%
   >1000 ng/mL 7 78% 5 42%
   10–1000 ng/nL 2 22% 2 17%
  TFV Not Detected (<10 ng/mL) 0 0% 5 42%
1

Table includes patients with a valid urine specimen who self-reported recent PrEP use on their specimen date, defined as last pill within 7 days of specimen collection.

2

Based on self-reported last pill data on date of specimen collection

3

Based on survey data, which may fall on a different date from the urine specimen collection

DISCUSSION

In our study of 100 TGW/TFI receiving PrEP in a real-world clinic, the vast majority had good PrEP adherence. Patients’ self-report was consistent with TFV levels detected in urine, with TFV >1000 ng/mL detected in 83% of samples at T2 and 80% of samples at T3. The majority of patients (56%) reported at least one PrEP “stop” during the nine-month study period. Most restarted PrEP, with between 16% and 21% stopping and restarting PrEP during each three-month period.

Our data highlight TGW/TFI’s capacity to adhere to daily PrEP and sustain PrEP use over time. Past studies have suggested that that healthcare providers may be less willing to prescribe PrEP to patients who they believe will not adhere.4347 Given research documenting evidence of bias toward TGW/TFI within U.S. healthcare,4853 it is important to underscore data that demonstrate high rates of adherence in this population. It is also important to note the concordance between patient self-report and urine TFV levels. These data suggest that providers can – and should – trust patient reports of PrEP adherence behavior, and support the use of adherence conversations in clinical settings. While there have been calls for increased use of point-of-care (POC) biological adherence monitoring for PrEP users,54,55 this approach raises several concerns. In addition to the logistical and cost barriers for community health centers, evidence suggests that this type of “monitoring” might be triggering for patients, or make them feel like they are not being trusted.56 This issue might be even more salient for TGW/TFI; the largest study of using biomarker testing to prompt increased PrEP adherence support was only able to enroll one TGW.57 Our data suggest that training providers to have more effective and open conversations with their patients about adherence may be an optimal strategy for ongoing clinical care.58

Our data have important implications for understanding and supporting patients who may experience periodic breaks in their daily PrEP use. While a complete analysis is beyond the scope of this brief report, the majority of reasons for PrEP “stops” focused on insurance/pharmacy issues, missed visits/missed refills or lost pills, or changes in sexual behavior that made PrEP less relevant. Most patients who stopped reported restarting PrEP, but we do not know whether they had an exposure in the interim. Additional research should focus on drivers of PrEP stops at the patient, clinic, and systems levels, and develop strategies that facilitate “prevention effective adherence.”59

Our study is limited by a sample collected in a real-world clinical setting, in which we prioritized the needs of our sample as patients, rather than as research participants. This method caused variability in sample size across time points, but may increase the generalizability of our findings and the validity of our data, as participants were not concerned about “pleasing” our research team in order to receive medication or compensation. Participants were patients of an LGBTQ-focused health center with specialization in PrEP and gender-affirming trans healthcare, as well as with integrated insurance and PrEP payment navigation services. This may constrain immediate generalizability of our findings for healthcare contexts without such program components in place.

In conclusion, among this sample of TGW/TFI receiving PrEP in an LGBTQ-focused community health center, we found strong PrEP adherence and high concordance between self-report and biological measures. The need for more data on real-world PrEP use among TGW/TFI continues to be critical, as is the development of comprehensive, patient-focused strategies for supporting PrEP adherence and sustained prevention-effective use.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by Grant R21MH116757 from the National Institute of Mental Health (S.A. Golub, PI). The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the individuals who gave their time and energy to participate in this study.

Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding:

This work was supported by grant # R21MH116757 from the National Institute of Mental Health. The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  • 1.Herbst JH, Jacobs ED, Finlayson TJ, et al. Estimating HIV Prevalence and Risk Behaviors of Transgender Persons in the United States: A Systematic Review. AIDS Behav. 2008;12(1):1–17. doi: 10.1007/s10461-007-9299-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Becasen JS, Denard CL, Mullins MM, Higa DH, Sipe TA. Estimating the prevalence of HIV and sexual behaviors among the US transgender population: a systematic review and meta-analysis, 2006–2017. Am J Public Health. 2019;109(1):e1–e8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV Infection, Risk, Prevention, and Testing Behaviors Among Transgender Women—National HIV Behavioral Surveillance, 7 U.S. Cities, 2019–2020 HIV Surveillance Special Report 27. Published 2021. Accessed October 25, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/library/reports/surveillance/cdc-hiv-surveillance-special-report-number-27.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Nuttbrock L, Bockting W, Rosenblum A, et al. Gender abuse, depressive symptoms, and HIV and other sexually transmitted infections among male-to-female transgender persons: a three-year prospective study. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(2):300–307. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300568 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sevelius JM, Keatley J, Calma N, Arnold E. “I am not a man”: Trans-specific barriers and facilitators to PrEP acceptability among transgender women. Glob Public Health. 2016;11(7–8):1060–1075. doi: 10.1080/17441692.2016.1154085 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Colson PW, Franks J, Wu Y, et al. Adherence to Pre-exposure Prophylaxis in Black Men Who Have Sex with Men and Transgender Women in a Community Setting in Harlem, NY. AIDS Behav. 2020;24(12):3436–3455. doi: 10.1007/s10461-020-02901-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Ogunbajo A, Storholm ED, Ober AJ, et al. Multilevel Barriers to HIV PrEP Uptake and Adherence Among Black and Hispanic/Latinx Transgender Women in Southern California. AIDS Behav. 2021;25(7):2301–2315. doi: 10.1007/s10461-021-03159-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Baldwin A, Light B, Allison WE. Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV Infection in Cisgender and Transgender Women in the U.S.: A Narrative Review of the Literature. Arch Sex Behav. 2021;50(4):1713–1728. doi: 10.1007/s10508-020-01903-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Pacífico de Carvalho N, Mendicino CCP, Cândido RCF, Alecrim DJD, Menezes de Pádua CA. HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) awareness and acceptability among trans women: a review. AIDS Care. 2019;31(10):1234–1240. doi: 10.1080/09540121.2019.1612014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Vaitses Fontanari AM, Zanella GI, Feijó M, Churchill S, Rodrigues Lobato MI, Costa AB. HIV-related care for transgender people: A systematic review of studies from around the world. Soc Sci Med. 2019;230:280–294. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.03.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Eaton LA, Kalichman SC, Price D, Finneran S, Allen A, Maksut J. Stigma and Conspiracy Beliefs Related to Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) and Interest in Using PrEP Among Black and White Men and Transgender Women Who Have Sex with Men. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(5):1236–1246. doi: 10.1007/s10461-017-1690-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Eaton LA, Matthews DD, Driffin DD, Bukowski L, Wilson PA, Stall RD. A Multi-US City Assessment of Awareness and Uptake of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV Prevention Among Black Men and Transgender Women Who Have Sex with Men. Prev Sci. 2017;18(5):505–516. doi: 10.1007/s11121-017-0756-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Wilson EC, Jin H, Liu A, Raymond HF. Knowledge, Indications and Willingness to Take Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis among Transwomen in San Francisco, 2013. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0128971. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128971 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Hood JE, Eljallad T, Abad J, et al. Getting pre-exposure prophylaxis to high-risk transgender women: lessons from Detroit, USA. Sex Health. 2018;15(6):562–569. doi: 10.1071/SH18063 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Sevelius JM, Poteat T, Luhur WE, Reisner SL, Meyer IH. HIV Testing and PrEP Use in a National Probability Sample of Sexually Active Transgender People in the United States. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2020;84(5):437–442. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002403 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Phillips G 2nd, Raman AB, Felt D, et al. PrEP4Love: The Role of Messaging and Prevention Advocacy in PrEP Attitudes, Perceptions, and Uptake Among YMSM and Transgender Women. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2020;83(5):450–456. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002297 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Matacotta JJ, Rosales-Perez FJ, Carrillo CM. HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis and Treatment as Prevention - Beliefs and Access Barriers in Men Who Have Sex With Men (MSM) and Transgender Women: A Systematic Review. J patient-centered Res Rev. 2020;7(3):265–274. doi: 10.17294/2330-0698.1737 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.D’Avanzo PA, Bass SB, Brajuha J, et al. Medical Mistrust and PrEP Perceptions Among Transgender Women: A Cluster Analysis. Behav Med. 2019;45(2):143–152. doi: 10.1080/08964289.2019.1585325 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Kuhns LM, Reisner SL, Mimiaga MJ, Gayles T, Shelendich M, Garofalo R. Correlates of PrEP Indication in a Multi-Site Cohort of Young HIV-Uninfected Transgender Women. AIDS Behav. 2016;20(7):1470–1477. doi: 10.1007/s10461-015-1182-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Wood SM, Lee S, Barg FK, Castillo M, Dowshen N. Young Transgender Women’s Attitudes Toward HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis. J Adolesc Health. 2017;60(5):549–555. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.12.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.D’Avanzo PA, Bass SB, Kelly PJ, Brajuha J, Gutierrez-Mock L, Sevelius J. Community Belonging and Attitudes Towards HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Among Transgender Women. AIDS Behav. 2021;25(9):2728–2742. doi: 10.1007/s10461-021-03183-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Nieto O, Fehrenbacher AE, Cabral A, Landrian A, Brooks RA. Barriers and motivators to pre-exposure prophylaxis uptake among Black and Latina transgender women in Los Angeles: perspectives of current PrEP users. AIDS Care. 2021;33(2):244–252. doi: 10.1080/09540121.2020.1769835 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Golub SA, Fikslin RA, Goldberg MH, Peña SM, Radix A. Predictors of PrEP Uptake Among Patients with Equivalent Access. AIDS Behav. 2019;23(7):1917–1924. doi: 10.1007/s10461-018-2376-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Rael CT, Martinez M, Giguere R, et al. Barriers and Facilitators to Oral PrEP Use Among Transgender Women in New York City. AIDS Behav. 2018;22(11):3627–3636. doi: 10.1007/s10461-018-2102-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Sidebottom D, Ekström AM, Strömdahl S. A systematic review of adherence to oral pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV - how can we improve uptake and adherence? BMC Infect Dis. 2018;18(1):581. doi: 10.1186/s12879-018-3463-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Sevelius JM, Glidden DV, Deutsch M, et al. Uptake, Retention, and Adherence to Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) in TRIUMPH: A Peer-Led PrEP Demonstration Project for Transgender Communities in Oakland and Sacramento, California. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2021;88(S1):S27–S38. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002808 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Wilson EC, Turner CM, Arayasirikul S, et al. Disparities in the PrEP continuum for trans women compared to MSM in San Francisco, California: results from population-based cross-sectional behavioural surveillance studies. J Int AIDS Soc. 2020;23 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):e25539. doi: 10.1002/jia2.25539 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Allison BA, Widman L, Stewart JL, Evans R, Perry M. Adherence to Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Adolesc Health. Published online May 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2021.04.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Wilson IB, Lee Y, Michaud J, Fowler FJJ, Rogers WH. Validation of a New Three-Item Self-Report Measure for Medication Adherence. AIDS Behav. 2016;20(11):2700–2708. doi: 10.1007/s10461-016-1406-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Anderson PL, Reirden D, Castillo-Mancilla J. Pharmacologic Considerations for Preexposure Prophylaxis in Transgender Women. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2016;72 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):S230–S234. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000001105 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Deutsch MB, Glidden DV, Sevelius J, et al. HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis in transgender women: a subgroup analysis of the iPrEx trial. Lancet HIV. 2015;2(12):e512–e519. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3018(15)00206-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Daughtridge G, Hebel S, Larabee L, et al. Development and Clinical Use Case of a Urine Tenofovir Adherence Test. In: HIV Diagnostics Conference.; 2019. https://1bf201fd-c82f-4641-bc1c-f4e692c66d3b.filesusr.com/ugd/0cfe6b_ae3ac94eeab64e5da3ee846c063bf46a.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Koenig H, Mounzer K, Daughtridge G, Al. E. Urine Assay for Tenofovir to Monitor Adherence in Real Time to TDF/FTC as PrEP. In: Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI).; 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Patel RR, Amico K, Harrison L, Al. E. Associations Between Urine Tenofovir Levels and Pharmacy Measures for Prep Adherence. International Association of Providers of AIDS Care. In: International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC).; 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Patel RR, Lalley-Chareczko L, Harrison LC, et al. Evaluating Urine With Dried Blood Spots To Assess Tenofovir Levels For PrEP Adherence. In: International AIDS Society (IAS).; 2017. Accessed December 4, 2020. https://d1dadca0-1ab9-47fb-ab68-457fbcc22cb4.filesusr.com/ugd/0cfe6b_4cd8f7c108824a56ac958f27de2859c4.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Koenig HC, Mounzer K, Daughtridge GW, et al. Urine assay for tenofovir to monitor adherence in real time to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine as pre-exposure prophylaxis. HIV Med. 2017;18(6):412–418. doi: 10.1111/hiv.12518 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Castillo-Mancilla J, Seifert S, Campbell K, et al. Emtricitabine-Triphosphate in Dried Blood Spots as a Marker of Recent Dosing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(11):6692–6697. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01017-16 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Grant RM, Anderson PL, McMahan V, et al. Uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis, sexual practices, and HIV incidence in men and transgender women who have sex with men: a cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14(9):820–829. doi: 10.1016/s1473-3099(14)70847-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Anderson PL, Glidden DV, Liu A, et al. Emtricitabine-tenofovir concentrations and pre-exposure prophylaxis efficacy in men who have sex with men. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4(151):151ra125–151ra125. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3004006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Hunt T, Lalley-Chareczko L, Daughtridge G, Swyryn M, Koenig H. Challenges to PrEP use and perceptions of urine tenofovir adherence monitoring reported by individuals on PrEP. AIDS Care. 2019;31(10):1203–1206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, et al. The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–381. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Pleuhs B, Quinn KG, Walsh JL, Petroll AE, John SA. Health Care Provider Barriers to HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis in the United States: A Systematic Review. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2020;34(3):111–123. doi: 10.1089/apc.2019.0189 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Castel AD, Feaster DJ, Tang W, et al. Understanding HIV Care Provider Attitudes Regarding Intentions to Prescribe PrEP. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015;70(5):520–528. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000000780 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Bogart LM, Kelly JA, Catz SL, Sosman JM. Impact of medical and nonmedical factors on physician decision making for HIV/AIDS antiretroviral treatment. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2000;23(5):396–404. doi: 10.1097/00126334-200004150-00006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Mullins TLK, Lally M, Zimet G, Kahn JA, Interventions AMTN for H. Clinician attitudes toward CDC interim pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) guidance and operationalizing PrEP for adolescents. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2015;29(4):193–203. doi: 10.1089/apc.2014.0273 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Hull SJ, Tessema H, Thuku J, Scott RK. Providers PrEP: Identifying Primary Health care Providers’ Biases as Barriers to Provision of Equitable PrEP Services. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2021;88(2):165–172. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002750 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Kattari SK, Bakko M, Hecht HK, Kinney MK. Intersecting Experiences of Healthcare Denials Among Transgender and Nonbinary Patients. Am J Prev Med. 2020;58(4):506–513. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2019.11.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Glick JL, Theall KP, Andrinopoulos KM, Kendall C. The Role of Discrimination in Care Postponement Among Trans-Feminine Individuals in the U.S. National Transgender Discrimination Survey. LGBT Heal. 2018;5(3):171–179. doi: 10.1089/lgbt.2017.0093 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Rodriguez A, Agardh A, Asamoah BO. Self-Reported Discrimination in Health-Care Settings Based on Recognizability as Transgender: A Cross-Sectional Study Among Transgender U.S. Citizens. Arch Sex Behav. 2018;47(4):973–985. doi: 10.1007/s10508-017-1028-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Drabish K, Theeke LA. Health Impact of Stigma, Discrimination, Prejudice, and Bias Experienced by Transgender People: A Systematic Review of Quantitative Studies. Issues Ment Health Nurs. Published online September 2021:1–8. doi: 10.1080/01612840.2021.1961330 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Romanelli M, Lindsey MA. Patterns of Healthcare Discrimination Among Transgender Help-Seekers. Am J Prev Med. 2020;58(4):e123–e131. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2019.11.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Howard SD, Lee KL, Nathan AG, Wenger HC, Chin MH, Cook SC. Healthcare Experiences of Transgender People of Color. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34(10):2068–2074. doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-05179-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Hannaford A, Arens Y, Koenig H. Real-Time Monitoring and Point-of-Care Testing: A Review of the Current Landscape of PrEP Adherence Monitoring. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2021;15:259–269. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S248696 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Drain PK, Bardon AR, Simoni JM, et al. Point-of-care and Near Real-time Testing for Antiretroviral Adherence Monitoring to HIV Treatment and Prevention. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2020;17(5):487–498. doi: 10.1007/s11904-020-00512-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Bardon AR, Simoni JM, Layman LM, Stekler JD, Drain PK. Perspectives on the utility and interest in a point-of-care urine tenofovir test for adherence to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis and antiretroviral therapy: an exploratory qualitative assessment among U.S. clients and providers. AIDS Res Ther. 2020;17(1):50. doi: 10.1186/s12981-020-00308-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Landovitz RJ, Beymer M, Kofron R, et al. Plasma Tenofovir Levels to Support Adherence to TDF/FTC Preexposure Prophylaxis for HIV Prevention in MSM in Los Angeles, California. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2017;76(5):501–511. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000001538 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Stirratt MJ, Dunbar-Jacob J, Crane HM, et al. Self-report measures of medication adherence behavior: recommendations on optimal use. Transl Behav Med. 2015;5(4):470–482. doi: 10.1007/s13142-015-0315-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Haberer JE. Current concepts for PrEP adherence in the PrEP revolution: from clinical trials to routine practice. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2016;11(1):10–17. doi: 10.1097/COH.0000000000000220 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES