HIV residual risk in Canada for apheresis source plasma donation without deferral for men who have sex with men

Should men who have ever had sex with men be allowed to donate blood in Brazil?

Many countries have modified their policies on banning or deferring blood donation by men who have sex with men (MSM) in light of ethical concerns and new evidence about transfusion risks. In Brazil, MSM were not eligible to donate blood unless they had been celibate for the previous 12 months. However, in May 2020, the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court overturned this restriction. Many authors have attempted to stress possible risks of transfusion-transmitted infection under various scenarios of changes in bans or restrictions on donations by MSM using mathematical models, but we consider that it is a difficult task due to the wide variety of sexual behaviors, attitudes, and practices. Among these factors, we highlight sex under the influence of illicit drugs, and the fact that people with an undetectable human immunodeficiency virus viral load have the potential to transmit should their blood be transfused. Despite these possible risks, we believe that some MSM can donate blood regardless of the time elapsed since their last sexual contact, especially because blood donations by MSM were occurring even when there were time-based deferral rules. Blood banks should always seek to use screening algorithms to identify high-risk sexual behaviors using gender-neutral criteria, and education about transfusion risks should be offered to healthcare workers and MSM.

End of selection criteria based on sexual orientation: An international symposium on alternatives to donation deferral

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Until recently, gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (MSM) were deferred from donating blood for 3-12 months since the last male-to-male sexual contact. This MSM deferral has been discontinued by several high-income countries (HIC) that now perform gender-neutral donor selection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An international symposium (held on 20-04-2023) gathered experts from seven HICs to (1) discuss how this paradigm shift might affect the mitigation strategies for transfusion-transmitted infections and (2) address the challenges related to gender-neutral donor selection.

RESULTS

Most countries employed a similar approach for implementing a gender-neutral donor selection policy: key stakeholders were consulted; the transition was bridged by time-limited deferrals; donor compliance was monitored; and questions or remarks on anal sex and the number and/or type of sexual partners were often added. Many countries have now adopted a gender-neutral approach in which questions on pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have been added (or retained, when already in place). Other countries used mitigation strategies, such as plasma quarantine or pathogen reduction technologies for plasma and/or platelets.

CONCLUSION

The experience with gender-neutral donor selection has been largely positive among the countries covered herein and seems to be acceptable to stakeholders, donors and staff. The post-implementation surveillance data collected so far appear reassuring with regards to safety, although longer observation periods are necessary. The putative risks associated with HIV antiretrovirals should be further investigated.

Men who have sex with men and risk for transfusion-transmissible infections in blood donors in Western countries: A systematic review update

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This systematic review update summarizes evidence concerning transfusion-transmissible infections (TTIs) in male blood donors reporting sex with another man (MSM) or after easing the MSM deferral period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched five databases, including studies comparing MSM versus non-MSM donors (Type I), MSM deferral periods (Type II) or infected versus non-infected donors (Type III) in Western countries, and used GRADE to determine evidence certainty.

RESULTS

Twenty-five observational studies were included. Four Type I studies suggest that there may be an increased risk for overall TTIs, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV) and syphilis in MSM donors, but the evidence is very uncertain. There was insufficient evidence of MSM with low-risk sexual behaviour. A Type II study indicates that easing the MSM deferral period to 1 year may have little to no effect on TTI risk. TTI prevalence in blood donors under 5-year, 1-year, 3-month or risk-based deferral in eight other Type II studies was too low to provide clear conclusions on the effect of easing the deferral. Three Type III studies reported that MSM may be a risk factor for HIV. Increased risk of HBV, hepatitis C virus and HTLV-I/II could not be shown. The evidence from Type III studies is very uncertain.

CONCLUSION

There may be an increased risk of HIV in MSM blood donors. Shortening the deferral from permanent to 1 year may have little to no effect on TTI risk. However, there is limited, unclear evidence from observational studies concerning the impact of introducing 3-month or risk-based deferrals.

Evolving the gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men time-based deferral to sexual risk screening for all donors: The contribution of Canadian research programmes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In Canada, the time deferral for gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) to donate blood has gradually decreased. In September 2022, this deferral was replaced with sexual behaviour-based screening for all donors. We investigate how data from targeted research programmes addressed knowledge gaps to support this change.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a scoping review describing the Canadian literature available before the research programmes relating to (1) behavioural indicators of HIV risk and (2) attitudes to blood donation among gbMSM, current donors and the general population. We summarize the targeted research programmes, their outputs and impact to date.

RESULTS

For question 1, five projects met inclusion criteria. For question 2, three articles met inclusion criteria. Knowledge gaps identified were insufficient evidence of HIV incidence in gbMSM who met other donor eligibility criteria and scant data on opinions and views of blood donation and screening criteria for sexual risk behaviours. The research programmes funded 19 projects at 11 different research sites involving over 100 individual researchers/collaborators resulting in 19 peer-reviewed publications to date. Leveraging existing gbMSM cohorts yielded relevant HIV incidence data to inform safety modelling studies. Findings indicated that sexual behaviour-based screening was acceptable to gbMSM and donors, and donor discomfort around specific questions could be mitigated with clear explanations.

CONCLUSION

Targeted research programmes filled critical knowledge gaps and informed a change to gender-neutral, sexual behaviour-based screening for all donors. Findings supported successful implementation of these changes with research-informed staff training.

Improved access yet inequitable experience: gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men's views of more inclusive criteria for source plasma donation

BACKGROUND

Canada has incrementally reduced restrictions to blood and plasma donation that impact men who have sex with men, gay, bisexual, and queer men, and some Two Spirit, transgender and non-binary individuals (MSM/2SGBTQ+). Prior to the launch of a pilot program in 2021 enabling some MSM/2SGBTQ + to donate source plasma, we explored the acceptability of the program among individuals who could become eligible to donate in the program.

METHODS

We invited men identifying as MSM/2SGBTQ + to participate in two consecutive semi-structured interviews to explore their views on blood and plasma donation policy, plasma donation, and the proposed Canadian plasma donation program. Interview transcripts were analyzed thematically and acceptability-related themes were mapped onto the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven men identifying as having sex with men participated in 53 interviews. Eighteen themes were mapped onto the seven construct domains of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Underlying all aspects of acceptability was a tension between four primary values influencing participants' views: altruism, equity, supply sufficiency, and evidence-based policy. The program was viewed as welcome progress on a discriminatory policy, with many excited to participate, yet tension with inequitable aspects of the program undermined support for the program and interest to contribute to it. The high demands of the program are unique for MSM/2SGBTQ + and are only tolerable as part of a program that is an incremental and instrumental step to more equitable donation policies.

CONCLUSION

Findings highlight past experiences of exclusion in Canada as a unique and critical part of the context of the donation experience among MSM/2SGBTQ+. Despite the program's goals of greater inclusivity of MSM/2SGBTQ + individuals, the anticipated experience of the program included continued stigmatization and inequities. Future research should seek to understand the experienced views of MSM/2SGBTQ + donors to ensure that as policies change, policies are implemented equitably.

Communicating the move to individualized donor selection policy: Framing messages focused on recipients and safety

BACKGROUND

Men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) have been deferred from donating blood. However, recent evidence supports the adoption of donor screening based on individuals' sexual behavior over population-based criteria. We explore how best to frame communications about adopting this change to minimize any potential negative consequences (e.g., reduced donor numbers). We examine the effectiveness of risk (emphasizing safety vs. emphasizing low risk), and focus (donor vs. recipient) frames on intentions to donate blood (approach) or feeling deterred from donating (avoid), and mechanisms linked to under-reporting sexual behavior.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a 2 (risk frame: risk vs. safety) by 3 (focus: donor vs. recipient vs. both) between-subjects online experiment (n = 2677). The main outcomes were intentions to donate and feelings of being put-off/deterred from donating (both for self and others). We also assessed the extent that forgetting, embarrassment/shame, and question irrelevance were perceived to be associated with under-reporting sexual behavior.

RESULTS

Frames that focused on safety or a recipient resulted in people reporting being less deterred from donating. Regardless of frame, people from ethnic minorities were more likely to feel deterred. Embarrassment/shame followed by forgetting and perceived irrelevance were the main reasons for under-reporting sexual behaviors, especially in ethnic minorities, and smartphones were perceived as an acceptable memory aid for sexual behavior.

DISCUSSION

Blood services moving to an individualized policy should frame donor selection in terms of safety and/or a recipient focus, explore sensitivities in ethnic minority communities, consider ways to normalize reporting sexual behavior, and use smartphones as a memory aid.

Validation of new, gender-neutral questions on recent sexual behaviors among plasma donors and men who have sex with men

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Several blood services might eventually interview donors with gender-neutral questions on sexual behaviors to improve the inclusivity of blood donation. We tested two ways (i.e., "scenarios") of asking donors about their recent sexual behaviors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study comprised 126 regular source plasma donors and 102 gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM), including 73 cis-gbMSM (i.e., the "cis-gbMSM subgroup," which excluded nonbinary, genderqueer, and trans individuals). In Scenario 1, participants were asked if, in the last 3 months, they "have […] had a new sexual partner or more than one sexual partner." In Scenario 2, they were asked "Have you had a new sexual partner?" and "have you had more than one sexual partner?". Validation questions included more specific questions on the type of partners and sexual activity.

RESULTS

Among plasma donors, sensitivity was 100.0% for both scenarios; specificity was 100.0% and 99.1% for Scenarios 1 and 2, respectively. Among gbMSM, sensitivity was 74.5% and 82.9% for Scenarios 1 and 2, respectively; specificity was 100.0% for both scenarios. Among cis-gbMSM, sensitivity was 88.6% and 100.0% for Scenarios 1 and 2, respectively; specificity was 100.0% for both scenarios. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of Scenario 2 was significantly higher than that of Scenario 1 among gbMSM and in the cis-gbMSM subgroup (all p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Scenario 2 questions performed well among plasma donors and cis-gbMSM, but less so in the broader gbMSM population.

Staff perspectives on barriers and enablers to implementing alternative source plasma eligibility criteria for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men

BACKGROUND

Canadian Blood Services introduced new eligibility criteria that allows some sexually active gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) to donate source plasma, marking a significant change from time-based deferral criteria. We aimed to identify potential barriers and enablers to implementing the new criteria from the perspective of donor center staff.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted Theoretical Domains Framework-informed interviews with staff from two source plasma donation centers in Canada.

RESULTS

We completed 28 interviews between June 2020 and April 2021. Three themes representing eight domains captured key tensions. Valuing inclusive eligibility criteria: staff support inclusive criteria; many were concerned the new criteria remained discriminatory. Investing in positive donor experiences: staff wished to foster positive donor experiences; however, they worried gbMSM donors would express anger and disappointment regarding the new criteria, staff would experience unease over using stigmatizing criteria and convey nonverbal cues of discomfort, and recurring plasma donors may behave inappropriately. Supporting education, training, and transparency of eligibility criteria: participants believed providing in-person training (i.e., to explain criteria rationale, address discomfort, practice responding to donor questions) and ensuring donors and the public were well-informed of the upcoming changes would improve implementation.

DISCUSSION

Participant views emphasize the importance of supporting staff through training and transparent communication to optimize the delivery of world-class equitable care for a new cohort of donors who have previously been excluded from plasma donation. Findings inform which staff supports to consider to improve implementation as policies continue to shift internationally.