Lipoatrophy/lipohypertrophy outcomes after antiretroviral therapy switch in children in the UK/Ireland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Following widespread use of stavudine, a thymidine analogue, in antiretroviral therapy (ART) over the past three decades, up to a third of children developed lipoatrophy (LA) and/or lipohypertrophy (LH). Following phasing-out of stavudine, incidence of newly-diagnosed LA and LH declined dramatically. However, the natural history of existing cases should be explored, particularly with prolonged protease inhibitor exposure. METHODS: The Collaborative HIV Paediatric Study (CHIPS) is a multicentre cohort study of most HIV-infected children in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Those on ART with a LA/LH assessment recorded in 2003-2011 were included. Assessments were completed annually by consultant physicians. Using the 0-3 grading system, LA or LH was defined as grade 2 or 3. Resolution was defined as return to grade 1 or 0 in all body regions. RESULTS: Of 1345 children followed for median (IQR) 5.5 (2.9, 8.2) years after ART initiation, 30 developed LA and 27 developed LH, all at least 2 years after ART initiation. Median age at LA diagnosis was 11 (10, 13) years and at LH diagnosis was 13 (11, 15) years. Children with LA were more likely white (p<0.0001); lower height-for-age z-score at ART initiation (p = 0.02); initiated ART earlier (p = 0.04), with longer ART exposure (p = 0.04). Children with LH were similar to those without. Analysis of individual drugs revealed that LA was associated with greater duration of exposure to stavudine and didanosine; while LH was associated with greater duration of exposure to stavudine and ritonavir (given alone or in combination with another protease inhibitor). Median time in follow-up following ART switch was 2.8 (1.9, 4.9) and 2.5 (1.6, 4.7) years respectively. Resolution occurred in 10 (30%) of LA cases (median time to resolution 2.3 [1.8, 3.6] years) and 3 (11%) of LH cases (median time to resolution 2.0 [1.7, 2.1] years). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of LA and LH were low, with some resolution noted, especially for LA. More long-term data are needed.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".