MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124259623 · doi:10.2196/24731

Subclinical and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Coinfected With HIV and Chronic Hepatitis B Virus From Clinical Outpatient Centers in France: Protocol for an Ambispective, Longitudinal Cohort Study

2021· article· en· W3124259623 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anders Boyd, Lorenza N C Dezanet, Raisha Kassime, Patrick Miailhes, Caroline Lascoux‐Combe, Julie Chas, Pierre‐Marie Girard, Joël Gozlan, Fabien Zoulim, Constance Delaugerre, Hayette Rougier, Karine Lacombe

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis B Virus Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSidactionGilead Sciences
KeywordsMedicineHBeAgCohortInternal medicineHepatitis B virusCohort studySubclinical infectionHepatitis BPopulationMulticenter AIDS Cohort StudyProspective cohort studyViral loadImmunologyHBsAgHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)VirusAntiretroviral therapyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous large-scale studies have examined the effect of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection on overall and cause-specific mortality in individuals with HIV. However, few studies have collected data on the subclinical indicators of HBV that lead to these severe outcomes in the coinfected population. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aim to describe the procedures of a cohort study extension aimed at assessing HBV-DNA replication, serological markers of HBV (hepatitis B e antigen [HBeAg] and hepatitis B surface antigen), and liver fibrosis and how these subclinical outcomes relate to mortality in predominately tenofovir-treated, coinfected patients with HIV-HBV. We assessed the characteristics at cohort inclusion of those who participated in the cohort extension, as well as those who did not participate due to being lost to follow-up or death. METHODS: Patients with HIV and chronic HBV who completed follow-up in a prospective cohort study conducted in 4 outpatient centers (Paris and Lyon, France; 2002-2011) were invited to participate in a cross-sectional visit from November 2016 to March 2018, during which a comprehensive evaluation of HIV- and HBV-related disease was undertaken. Virological and clinical data since the previous study visit were retrospectively collected. RESULTS: Of the 308 individuals enrolled in the cohort, 147 (47.7%) participated in the cross-sectional study. At this visit, most participants were HBeAg negative (111/134, 82.8% with available data), had undetectable HBV DNA (124/132, 93.9% with available data), and were undergoing antiretroviral therapy containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or tenofovir alafenamide (114/147, 77.6%). There were no significant differences in characteristics at cohort inclusion between those who did and did not complete the cross-sectional visit, except for a lower proportion with an AIDS-defining illness (30/147, 20.5% vs 49/161, 30.4%, respectively; P=.04). Of the 161 nonparticipating individuals, 42 (26.1%) died, 41 (25.4%) were lost to follow-up and known to be alive, and 78 (48.4%) were lost to follow-up with unknown vital status. Most differences in characteristics at cohort inclusion were observed between deceased individuals and those participating in the cross-sectional visit or those lost to follow-up. With this extension, the median follow-up time of the overall cohort is presently 9.2 years (IQR 3.4-14.6). CONCLUSIONS: Extended follow-up of the French HIV-HBV cohort will provide important long-term data on the subclinical trajectory of HBV disease in the coinfected population. The biases due to the relatively high rate of those lost to follow-up need to be assessed in future studies of this cohort. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/24731.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.227
GPT teacher head0.571
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicHepatitis B Virus StudiesFrench-language works237,207