Association of aging and survival in a large HIV-infected cohort on antiretroviral therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine if there is a significant difference in survival between elderly (>50 years) and nonelderly adult patients receiving combination antiretroviral therapy in Uganda between 2004 and 2010. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. METHODS: Patients 18-49 years of age (nonelderly) and 50 years of age and older enrolled in the AIDS Support Organization Uganda HIV/AIDS national programme were assessed for time to all-cause mortality. We applied a Weibull multivariable regression. RESULTS: Among the 22 087 patients eligible for analyses, 19 657 (89.0%) were aged between 18 and 49 years and 2430 (11.0%) were aged 50 years or older. These populations differed in terms of the distributions of sex, baseline CD4 cell count and death. The age group 40-44 displayed the lowest crude mortality rate [31.4 deaths per 1000 person-years; 95% confidence interval (CI) 28.1, 34.7) and the age group 60-64 displayed the highest crude mortality rate (58.9 deaths per 1000 person-years; 95% CI 42.2, 75.5). Kaplan-Meier survival estimates indicated that nonelderly patients had better survival than elderly patients (P < 0.001). Adjusted Weibull analysis indicated that elderly age status was importantly associated (adjusted hazard ratio 1.23, 95% CI 1.08-1.42) with mortality, when controlling for sex, baseline CD4 cell count and year of therapy initiation. CONCLUSION: As antiretroviral treatment cohorts mature, the proportion of patients who are elderly will inevitably increase. Elderly patients may require focused clinical care that extends beyond HIV treatment.
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".