Circumcision Reduces HIV Rates, U.S. Studies Confirm

(Page 2)

In one of the two studies, researchers enrolled 2,784 HIV-negative, uncircumcised men in Kenya beginning in 2002. The other study, in Uganda, started in 2003 and enrolled 4,996 HIV-negative, uncircumcised men.

Some of the men were assigned to immediately undergo circumcision, while others had to wait two years.

Then researchers studied whether the circumcision had any effect on their rates of getting HIV.

The results were so encouraging that an oversight board halted the studies this week, and ordered that all participants be given circumcisions instead of having to wait.

In Kenya, researchers found that only 22 of the 1,393 circumcised men in the study were infected with HIV, compared to 47 of the 1,391 men who had yet to be circumcised.

The numbers for Uganda weren't immediately available.

"Circumcision is now a proven, effective prevention strategy to reduce HIV infections in men," Robert Bailey, a study investigator and professor of epidemiology at the University of Illinois at Chicago, said in a statement.

It's not entirely clear how circumcision reduces HIV infection. But researchers have suggested that the foreskin may provide a moist, safe environment for the AIDS virus and provide more immune cells for HIV to infect.

Coates called the study results the "second greatest finding in HIV prevention," right behind research that confirmed drugs could stop mother-to-baby transmission of the AIDS virus.

Still, he added, "combination prevention" remains crucial -- combining circumcision with using condoms, reducing sexual partners, and delaying the first time people have intercourse.

The Associated Press reported that the link between male circumcision and HIV prevention was first noted in the late 1980s. The first major clinical trial, of 3,000 men in South Africa, found last year that circumcision cut the HIV risk by 60 percent.

More information

The Nemours Foundation's Web site discusses the pros and cons of circumcision.