Molecular and Clinical Epidemiology of CXCR4‐Using HIV‐1 in a Large Population of Antiretroviral‐Naive Individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We wished to characterize the epidemiological and clinical correlates of CXCR4-using human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) ("X4 variants") in a cross-sectional analysis of a large population of antiretroviral-naive individuals. METHODS: HIV-1 coreceptor use was determined in the last pretherapy plasma sample for 1191 individuals initiating triple-combination therapy in British Columbia, Canada. Baseline variables investigated included sociodemographic characteristics, plasma viral load (pVL), CD4 cell count, AIDS diagnosis, HIV-1 V3 loop sequence, and human CCR5 Delta 32 genotype. RESULTS: Individuals harboring X4 variants (n = 178 of 979 phenotyped samples; 18.2%) displayed a poorer baseline clinical profile than individuals harboring exclusively CCR5-using HIV-1 ("R5 variants") (median pVL, 175,000 vs. 120,000 copies of HIV-1 RNA/mL [P = .0006]; median CD4 cell count, 110 vs. 290 cells/mm(3) [P < .0001]). Individuals heterozygous for the CCR5 Delta 32 deletion (n = 128 of 967; 13.2%) were at 2.5 times higher risk of harboring X4 variants, compared with those without the deletion (multivariate P = .0005). The presence of basic amino acids at codon 11 and/or codon 25 of HIV-1 V3 (n = 109 of 955; 11.4%) was associated with a 9.1 times higher risk of harboring X4 variants (multivariate P < .0001), regardless of CCR5 Delta 32 genotype. In multivariate analyses adjusting for baseline parameters, HIV-1 coreceptor use was not found to be a significant predictor of survival or treatment response. CONCLUSION: Baseline CD4 cell count, pVL, HIV-1 V3 sequence, and CCR5 Delta 32 genotype were the strongest determinants of CXCR4-using HIV-1 in this population. After adjustment for baseline parameters, the presence of X4 variants before initiation of highly active antiretroviral therapy was not independently associated with a poorer outcome of therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 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".