Immediate Antiretroviral Therapy Decreases Mortality Among Patients With High CD4 Counts in China: A Nationwide, Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Clinical trials have demonstrated that immediate initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) reduces AIDS-related morbidity and mortality. We tested the hypothesis that initiating ART ≤30 days after human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) diagnosis would be associated with reduced mortality among people living with HIV (PLWH) with CD4 counts >500 cells/μL. Methods: PLWH enrolled in the Chinese National HIV Information System between January 2012 and June 2014 with CD4 counts >500 cells/μL were followed for 12 months. Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine hazard ratios (HRs) for PLWH who initiated ART after HIV diagnosis. ART initiation was treated as a time-dependent variable. Results: We enrolled 34581 PLWH with CD4 >500 cells/μL; 1838 (5.3%) initiated ART ≤30 days after diagnosis (immediate ART group), and 19 deaths were observed with a mortality rate of 1.04 per 100 person-years (PY). Fifty-eight deaths were documented among the 5640 PLWH in the delayed ART group with a mortality rate of 2.25 per 100 PY. There were 713 deaths among the 27103 PLWH in the no ART group with a mortality rate of 2.39 per 100 PY. After controlling for potential confounding factors, ART initiation at ≤30 days (adjusted HR, 0.37 [95% confidence interval, .23-.58]) was a statistically significant protective factor. Conclusions: We found that immediate ART is associated with a 63% reduction in overall mortality among PLWH with CD4 counts >500 cells/μL in China, supporting the recommendation to initiate ART immediately following HIV diagnosis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".