A Comparison of Virological Suppression and Rebound between Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Persons Initiating Combination Antiretroviral Therapy in a Multisite Cohort of Individuals Living with HIV in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background This study compared time to virological suppression and rebound between Indigenous and non-Indigenous individuals living with HIV in Canada initiating combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). Methods Data were from the Canadian Observational Cohort collaboration; eight studies of treatment-naive persons with HIV initiating cART after 1/1/2000. Fine and Gray models were used to estimate the effect of ethnicity on time to virological suppression (two consecutive viral loads [VLs] <50 copies/ml at least 3 months apart) after adjusting for the competing risk of death and time until virological rebound (two consecutive VLs >200 copies/ml at least 3 months apart) following suppression. Results Among 7,080 participants were 497 Indigenous persons of whom 413 (83%) were from British Columbia. The cumulative incidence of suppression 1 year after cART initiation was 54% for Indigenous persons, 77% for Caucasian and 80% for African, Caribbean or Black (ACB) persons. The cumulative incidence of rebound 1 year after suppression was 13% for Indigenous persons, 6% for Caucasian and 7% for ACB persons. Indigenous persons were less likely to achieve suppression than Caucasian participants (aHR=0.58, 95% CI 0.50, 0.68), but not more likely to experience rebound (aHR=1.03, 95% CI 0.84, 1.27) after adjusting for age, gender, injection drug use, men having sex with men status, province of residence, baseline VL and CD4 + T-cell count, antiretroviral class and year of cART initiation. Conclusions Lower suppression rates among Indigenous persons suggest a need for targeted interventions to improve HIV health outcomes during the first year of treatment when suppression is usually achieved.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".