Comparison of Kaposi Sarcoma Risk in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Positive Adults Across 5 Continents: A Multiregional Multicohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We compared Kaposi sarcoma (KS) risk in adults who started antiretroviral therapy (ART) across the Asia-Pacific, South Africa, Europe, Latin, and North America. METHODS: We included cohort data of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive adults who started ART after 1995 within the framework of 2 large collaborations of observational HIV cohorts. We present incidence rates and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs). RESULTS: We included 208140 patients from 57 countries. Over a period of 1066572 person-years, 2046 KS cases were diagnosed. KS incidence rates per 100000 person-years were 52 in the Asia-Pacific and ranged between 180 and 280 in the other regions. KS risk was 5 times higher in South African women (aHR, 4.56; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 2.73-7.62) than in their European counterparts, and 2 times higher in South African men (2.21; 1.34-3.63). In Europe, Latin, and North America KS risk was 6 times higher in men who have sex with men (aHR, 5.95; 95% CI, 5.09-6.96) than in women. Comparing patients with current CD4 cell counts ≥700 cells/µL with those whose counts were <50 cells/µL, the KS risk was halved in South Africa (aHR, 0.53; 95% CI, .17-1.63) but reduced by ≥95% in other regions. CONCLUSIONS: Despite important ART-related declines in KS incidence, men and women in South Africa and men who have sex with men remain at increased KS risk, likely due to high human herpesvirus 8 coinfection rates. Early ART initiation and maintenance of high CD4 cell counts are essential to further reducing KS incidence worldwide, but additional measures might be needed, especially in Southern Africa.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".