Relationship between HIV-1 Env subtypes A and D and disease progression in a rural Ugandan cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of HIV-1 envelope subtypes on disease progression in a rural cohort of Ugandan adults where two major HIV-1 subtypes (A and D) exist. METHODS: Participants of a clinical cohort seen between December 1995 and December 1998 had blood collected for HIV-1 subtyping. These included prevalent cases (people already infected with HIV at the start of the study in 1990) and incident cases (those who seroconverted between 1990 and December 1998). HIV-1 subtyping was carried out by heteroduplex mobility assay and DNA sequencing in the V3 env region. Disease progression was measured by the rate of CD4 lymphocyte count decline, clinical progression for the incident cases as time from seroconversion to AIDS or death, to first CD4 lymphocyte count < 200 x 10(6)/l and to the World Health Organization clinical stage 3. All analyses were adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-four individuals, including 47 prevalent and 117 incident cases, had V3 env subtype data of which 65 (40%) were subtyped as A and 99 as D. In the incident cases, 44 (38%) were subtyped as A and 73 as D. There was a suggestion that for most end-points A had a slower progression than D. The cumulative probability of remaining free from AIDS or death at 6 years post-seroconversion was 0.72 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.50 to 0.85] for A and 0.58 (95% CI, 0.42 to 0.71) for D, and the adjusted hazard ratio of subtype D compared to A was estimated to be 1.39 (95% CI, 0.66 to 2.94; P = 0.39). The estimated difference in rates of decline in square root CD4 lymphocyte counts was -0.41 per year (95% CI, -0.98 to 0.15; P = 0.15). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that although subtype A may have a slower progression than D, HIV-1 envelope subtype is not a major factor in determining the progression of HIV-1 disease in a rural population in Uganda.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".