HIV-1 molecular transmission clusters in nine European countries and Canada: association with demographic and clinical factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Knowledge of HIV-1 molecular transmission clusters (MTCs) is important, especially in large-scale datasets, for designing prevention programmes and public health intervention strategies. We used a large-scale HIV-1 sequence dataset from nine European HIV cohorts and one Canadian, to identify MTCs and investigate factors associated with the probability of belonging to MTCs. Methods To identify MTCs, we applied maximum likelihood inferences on partial pol sequences from 8955 HIV-positive individuals linked to demographic and clinical data. MTCs were defined using two different criteria: clusters with bootstrap support >75% (phylogenetic confidence criterion) and clusters consisting of sequences from a specific region at a proportion of >75% (geographic criterion) compared to the total number of sequences within the network. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess factors associated with MTC clustering. Results Although 3700 (41%) sequences belonged to MTCs, proportions differed substantially by country and subtype, ranging from 7% among UK subtype C sequences to 63% among German subtype B sequences. The probability of belonging to an MTC was independently less likely for women than men (OR = 0.66; P < 0.001), older individuals (OR = 0.79 per 10-year increase in age; P < 0.001) and people of non-white ethnicity (OR = 0.44; P < 0.001 and OR = 0.70; P = 0.002 for black and ‘other’ versus white, respectively). It was also more likely among men who have sex with men (MSM) than other risk groups (OR = 0.62; P < 0.001 and OR = 0.69; P = 0.002 for people who inject drugs, and sex between men and women, respectively), subtype B (ORs 0.36–0.70 for A, C, CRF01 and CRF02 versus B; all P < 0.05), having a well-estimated date of seroconversion (OR = 1.44; P < 0.001), a later calendar year of sampling (ORs 2.01–2.61 for all post-2002 periods versus pre-2002; all P < 0.01), and being naïve to antiretroviral therapy at sampling (OR = 1.19; P = 0.010). Conclusions A high proportion (>40%) of individuals belonged to MTCs. Notably, the HIV epidemic dispersal appears to be driven by subtype B viruses spread within MSM networks. Expansion of regional epidemics seems mainly associated with recent MTCs, rather than the growth of older, established ones. This information is important for designing prevention and public health intervention strategies.
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".