Immunologic Response to Antiretroviral Therapy in Hepatitis C Virus–Coinfected Adults in a Population‐Based HIV/AIDS Treatment Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We sought to characterize the impact that hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has on CD4 cells during the first 48 weeks of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in previously ART-naive human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients. METHODS: The HIV/AIDS Drug Treatment Programme at the British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS distributes all ART in this Canadian province. Eligible individuals were those whose first-ever ART included 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and either a protease inhibitor or a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and who had a documented positive result for HCV antibody testing. Outcomes were binary events (time to an increase of > or = 75 CD4 cells/mm3 or an increase of > or = 10% in the percentage of CD4 cells in the total T cell population [CD4 cell fraction]) and continuous repeated measures. Statistical analyses used parametric and nonparametric methods, including multivariate mixed-effects linear regression analysis and Cox proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: Of 1186 eligible patients, 606 (51%) were positive and 580 (49%) were negative for HCV antibodies. HCV antibody-positive patients were slower to have an absolute (P<.001) and a fraction (P = .02) CD4 cell event. In adjusted Cox proportional hazards analysis (controlling for age, sex, baseline absolute CD4 cell count, baseline pVL, type of ART initiated, AIDS diagnosis at baseline, adherence to ART regimen, and number of CD4 cell measurements), HCV antibody-positive patients were less likely to have an absolute CD4 cell event (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.84 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.98]) and somewhat less likely to have a CD4 cell fraction event (AHR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.70-1.14]) than HCV antibody-negative patients. In multivariate mixed-effects linear regression analysis, HCV antibody-negative patients had increases of an average of 75 cells in the absolute CD4 cell count and 4.4% in the CD4 cell fraction, compared with 20 cells and 1.1% in HCV antibody-positive patients, during the first 48 weeks of ART, after adjustment for time-updated pVL, number of CD4 cell measurements, and other factors. CONCLUSION: HCV antibody-positive HIV-infected patients may have an altered immunologic response to ART.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".