1,720,967 research outputs found
Incidence of dyslipidemia in people with HIV who are treated with integrase inhibitors versus other antiretroviral agents
No full textOBJECTIVE
To compare the incidence of dyslipidemia in people with HIV receiving integrase inhibitors (INSTI) versus boosted protease inhibitors (PI/b) and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) within RESPOND consortium of prospective cohorts.
METHODS
Participants were eligible if they were at least 18 years, without dyslipidemia and initiated or switched to a three-drug antiretroviral therapy (ART)-regimen consisting of either INSTI, NNRTI, or PI/b for the first time, between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2018. Dyslipidemia was defined as random total cholesterol more than 240 mg/dl, HDL less than 35 mg/dl, triglyceride more than 200 mg/dl, or initiation of lipid-lowering therapy. Poisson regression was used to determine the adjusted incidence rate ratios. Follow-up was censored after 3 years or upon ART-regimen discontinuation or last lipid measurement or 31 December 2019, whichever occurred first.
RESULTS
Overall, 4577 people with HIV were eligible (INSTI = 66.9%, PI/b = 12.5%, and NNRTI = 20.6%), 1938 (42.3%) of whom were ART-naive. During 1.7 (interquartile range, 0.6-3.0) median years of follow-up, 1460 participants developed dyslipidemia [incidence rate: 191.6 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval (CI) 182.0-201.7]. Participants taking INSTI had a lower incidence of dyslipidemia compared with those on PI/b (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.71; CI 0.59-0.85), but higher rate compared with those on NNRTI (1.35; CI 1.15-1.58). Compared with dolutegravir, the incidence of dyslipidemia was higher with elvitegravir/cobicistat (1.20; CI 1.00-1.43) and raltegravir (1.24; CI 1.02-1.51), but lower with rilpivirine (0.77; CI 0.63-0.94).
CONCLUSION
In this large consortium of heterogeneous cohorts, dyslipidemia was less common with INSTI than with PI/b. Compared with dolutegravir, dyslipidemia was more common with elvitegravir/cobicistat and raltegravir, but less common with rilpivirine
How to RESPOND to Modern Challenges for People Living with HIV: A Profile for a New Cohort Consortium.
Full text linkBACKGROUND
the International Cohort Consortium of Infectious Disease (RESPOND) is a collaboration dedicated to research on HIV and other infectious diseases.
METHODS
RESPOND is a flexible organization, with several independent substudies operating under one shared governance. HIV-related variables, including full antiretroviral therapy (ART) history, are collected annually for all participants and merged with substudy specific data into a shared data pool. Incident clinical events are reported using standardized forms. Prospective follow-up started 1/10/17 (enrolment) with retrospective data collected back to 01/01/12.
RESULTS
Overall, 17 cohorts from Europe and Australia provided data on 26,258 people living with HIV (PLWH). The majority (43.3%) of the population were white, with men-sex-with-men accounting for 43.3% of the risk for HIV acquisition. The median age was 48 years (IQR 40-56) and 5.2% and 25.5% were known to be co-infected with hepatitis B or C. While 5.3% were ART-naïve, the median duration on ART was 10.1 years (4.8-17.6), with 89.5% having a VL <200 copies/mL and the median CD4 count being 621 cells/µL (438-830). Malignancies (n = 361) and cardiovascular disease (n = 168) were the predominant reported clinical events.
CONCLUSION
RESPOND's large, diverse study population and standardized clinical endpoints puts the consortium in a unique position to respond to the diverse modern challenges for PLWH
How to RESPOND to Modern Challenges for People Living with HIV: A Profile for a New Cohort Consortium
No full textBackground: the International Cohort Consortium of Infectious Disease (RESPOND) is a collaboration dedicated to research on HIV and other infectious diseases. Methods: RESPOND is a flexible organization, with several independent substudies operating under one shared governance. HIV-related variables, including full antiretroviral therapy (ART) history, are collected annually for all participants and merged with substudy specific data into a shared data pool. Incident clinical events are reported using standardized forms. Prospective follow-up started 1/10/17 (enrolment) with retrospective data collected back to 01/01/12. Results: Overall, 17 cohorts from Europe and Australia provided data on 26,258 people living with HIV (PLWH). The majority (43.3%) of the population were white, with men-sex-with-men accounting for 43.3% of the risk for HIV acquisition. The median age was 48 years (IQR 40–56) and 5.2% and 25.5% were known to be co-infected with hepatitis B or C. While 5.3% were ART-naïve, the median duration on ART was 10.1 years (4.8–17.6), with 89.5% having a VL &lt;200 copies/mL and the median CD4 count being 621 cells/µL (438–830). Malignancies (n = 361) and cardiovascular disease (n = 168) were the predominant reported clinical events. Conclusion: RESPOND’s large, diverse study population and standardized clinical endpoints puts the consortium in a unique position to respond to the diverse modern challenges for PLWH
The relationship between smoking, current CD4, viral load and cancer in persons living with HIV
Full text linkBACKGROUND: It is unknown if the carcinogenic effect of smoking is influenced by CD4 count and viral load (VL) in persons living with HIV. MATERIAL AND METHODS: RESPOND participants with known smoking status were included. Poisson regression adjusting for baseline confounders investigated the interaction between current CD4/VL strata (good [CD4≥500/mm and VL200 copies/ml] and intermediate [all other combinations]), smoking status and all cancers, non-AIDS defining cancers (NADC), smoking-related cancers (SRC), and infection-related cancers (IRC). RESULTS: Of 19602 persons, 41.3% were never smokers 44.4% current and 14.4% previous smokers at baseline. CD4/VL strata were poor in 3.4%, intermediate in 44.8% and good in 51.8%. There were 513 incident cancers; incidence rate 6.9/1000 PYFU (95% CI 6.3-7.5). Current smokers had higher incidence of all cancer (adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.45; 1.17-1.79), NADC (1.65; 1.31-2.09), SRC (2.21; 1.53-3.20), and IRC (1.38; 0.97-1.96) vs never smokers. Those with poor CD4/VL had increased incidence of all cancer (5.36; 95% CI 3.71-7.75), NADC (3.14; 1.92-5.14), SRC (1.82; 0.76-4.41) and IRC (10.21; 6.06-17.20) versus those with good CD4/VL. There was no evidence that the association between smoking and cancer subtypes differed depending on the CD4/VL strata (p > 0.1, test for interaction). CONCLUSIONS: In the large RESPOND consortium, the impact of smoking on cancer was clear and reducing smoking rates should remain a priority. The association between current immune deficiency, virological control and cancer was similar for never smokers, current smokers and previous smokers suggesting similar carcinogenic effects of smoking regardless of CD4 count and VL
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
