HIV Infection, Immunosuppression, and Age at Diagnosis of Non-AIDS-Defining Cancers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: It is unclear whether immunosuppression leads to younger ages at cancer diagnosis among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLWH). A previous study found that most cancers are not diagnosed at a younger age in people with AIDS, with the exception of anal and lung cancers. This study extends prior work to include all PLWH and examines associations between AIDS, CD4 count, and age at cancer diagnosis. Methods: We compared the median age at cancer diagnosis between PLWH in the North American AIDS Cohort Collaboration on Research and Design and the general population using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program. We used statistical weights to adjust for population differences. We also compared median age at cancer diagnosis by AIDS status and CD4 count. Results: After adjusting for population differences, younger ages at diagnosis (P < .05) were observed for PLWH compared with the general population for lung (difference in medians = 4 years), anal (difference = 4), oral cavity/pharynx (difference = 2), and kidney cancers (difference = 2) and myeloma (difference = 4). Among PLWH, having an AIDS-defining event was associated with a younger age at myeloma diagnosis (difference = 4; P = .01), and CD4 count <200 cells/µL (vs ≥500) was associated with a younger age at lung cancer diagnosis (difference = 4; P = .006). Conclusions: Among PLWH, most cancers are not diagnosed at younger ages. However, this study strengthens evidence that lung cancer, anal cancer, and myeloma are diagnosed at modestly younger ages, and also shows younger ages at diagnosis of oral cavity/pharynx and kidney cancers, possibly reflecting accelerated cancer progression, etiologic heterogeneity, or risk factor exposure in PLWH.
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) | 0.000 | 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".