The role of HIV/hepatitis B virus/hepatitis C virus RNA+ triple infection in end-stage liver disease and all-cause mortality in Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are limited data on end-stage liver disease (ESLD) and mortality in people with HIV (PWH) coinfected with both hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV). METHODS: All PWH aged greater than 18 under follow-up in EuroSIDA positive for HBsAg (HBV), and/or HCVRNA+, were followed from baseline (latest of 1 January 2001, EuroSIDA recruitment, known HBV/HCV status) to ESLD, death, last visit, or 31 December 2020. Follow-up while HCVRNA- was excluded. In two separate models, Poisson regression compared three groups updated over time; HIV/HBV, HIV/HCV, and HIV/HBV/HCV. RESULTS: Among 5733 included individuals, 4476 (78.1%) had HIV/HCV, 953 (16.6%) had HIV/HBV and 304 (5.3%) had HIV/HBV/HCV. In total, 289 (5%) developed ESLD during 34 178 person-years of follow-up (PYFU), incidence 8.5/1000 PYFU [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.5-9.4] and 707 deaths occurred during 34671 PYFU (incidence 20.4/1000 PYFU; 95% CI 18.9-21.9). After adjustment, compared with those with HIV/HCV, persons with HIV/HBV had significantly lower rates of ESLD [adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) 0.53; 95% CI 0.34-0.81]. Those with HIV/HBV/HCV had marginally significantly higher rates of ESLD (aIRR 1.49; 95% CI 0.98-2.26). Those under follow-up in 2014 or later had significantly lower rates of ESLD compared with 2007-2013 (aIRR 0.65; 95% CI 0.47-0.89). Differences in ESLD between the three groups were most pronounced in those aged at least 40. After adjustment, there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality across the three groups. CONCLUSION: HIV/HBV-coinfected individuals had lower rates of ESLD and HIV/HBV/HCV had higher rates of ESLD compared with those with HIV/HCV, especially in those aged more than 40. ESLD decreased over time across all groups. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02699736.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".