Statistics from Altmetric.com
The prevalence of gonorrhoea within populations is sustained by continued transmission from asymptomatically infected persons, particularly core group transmitters within sexual networks associated with high gonococcal transmission frequencies.1 It is believed that core group transmitters typically maintain a longer period of infectivity through repeat infections.2 Disentangling the relative importance of the various combinations of oral, genital, anal and other forms of sexual contact as drivers of gonococcal transmission in core group transmitters and their communities has proven a major challenge to researchers.
One critical research question still to be addressed relates to quantification of the relative importance of oropharyngeal infections, and in particular kissing, in driving the upward trajectory of Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections observed in many parts of the world today. Recent modelling data have suggested that kissing, in particularly deeper ‘tongue kissing’, may be the major route of gonococcal transmission between men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM).3 In this issue, Cornelisse et al provide clinical support for this hypothesis through a cross-sectional analysis of gonorrhoea in 60 MSM couples attending Melbourne Sexual Health Centre.4 The authors describe a new paradigm which proposes that most N. gonorrhoeae transmission is unidirectional from either the oropharynx or the anus to the urethra; this is in contrast to the conventional paradigm which emphasises the central role of urethral infections in the dissemination of gonorrhoea.
In their paper, Cornelisse et al highlight their belief that saliva from those MSM with oropharyngeal N. gonorrhoeae infections was responsible for most of the oropharyngeal, penile and anorectal gonococcal infections detected …
Handling editor Prof Jackie A Cassell
Contributors This editorial was written solely by David A. Lewis.
Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests No, there are no competing interests for any author.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.