Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia prophylaxis is not required with a CD4+ T-cell count < 200 cells/μl when viral replication is suppressed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety of discontinuing Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PCP) prophylaxis, in patients on effective antiretroviral therapy with CD4+ T-cell counts that have plateaued at < 200 cells/microl. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated a cohort of HIV infected patients at a multidisciplinary HIV clinic with sustained HIV RNA levels < 50 copies/ml and CD4+ T-cell counts that have plateaued at < 200 cells/microl and who have discontinued PCP prophylaxis. RESULTS: Nineteen patients fulfilled the above criteria. Eleven had been taking daily trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, seven were receiving monthly aerosolized pentamidine, and one patient never received any prophylaxis. The median CD4+ T-cell count at the time of discontinuation and at the most recent determination were 120 (range, 34-184) and 138 (range, 6-201) cells/microl, respectively. To date, patients have been off PCP prophylaxis for a mean of 13.7 +/- 10.6 months and a median of 9.0 (range 3-39) months for a total of 261 patient-months. To date, no patient has developed PCP. This is significantly different from the risk of developing PCP with a CD4+ T-cell count of < 200 cells/microl in untreated HIV infection (rate difference 9.2%; 95% confidence interval, 5.7 to 12.8%; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: With sustained suppression of viral replication, PCP prophylaxis may not be necessary, regardless of CD4+ T-cell count. This illustrates a degree of immune recovery that occurs with virologic suppression that is not reflected in absolute CD4+ T-cell count or percentage and suggests that guidelines for P. jiroveci pneumonia prophylaxis may need to be re-evaluated.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".