4.7 Article

CD4:CD8 Ratio and CD8 Count as Prognostic Markers for Mortality in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Patients on Antiretroviral Therapy: The Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration (ART-CC)

Journal

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 65, Issue 6, Pages 959-966

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cid/cix466

Keywords

CD8 count; CD4:CD8 ratio; mortality; HIV; antiretroviral therapy

Funding

  1. UK Medical Research Council (MRC) [MR/J002380/1]
  2. UK Department for International Development (DFID) under the MRC/DFID Concordat
  3. European Union
  4. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0611-10168]
  5. Agence Nationale de Recherche sur le SIDA et les hepatites virales (ANRS)
  6. Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM)
  7. French Ministry of Health
  8. Italian Ministry of Health
  9. Spanish Ministry of Health
  10. Swiss National Science Foundation [33CS30_134277]
  11. Ministry of Science and Innovation
  12. Spanish Network for AIDS Research (RIS) [ISCIII-RETIC RD06/006]
  13. Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport through the Centre for Infectious Disease Control of the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment
  14. European Commission [260694]
  15. British Columbia government
  16. Alberta government
  17. National Institutes of Health (NIH) (University of Washington Center for AIDS Research [CFAR]) (NIH) [P30 AI027757]
  18. University of Alabama at Birmingham CFAR (NIH) [P30-AI027767]
  19. Tennessee CFAR (NIH) [P30 AI110527]
  20. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism [U10-AA13566, U24-AA020794]
  21. US Department of Veterans Affairs
  22. Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research
  23. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  24. Veterans Health Administration Office of Research and Development
  25. European Union [260694]
  26. MRC [G0100221, G0700820, MR/J002380/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  27. Medical Research Council [G0100221, G0700820, MR/J002380/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  28. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0616-10111, NF-SI-0611-10168] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. We investigated whether CD4:CD8 ratio and CD8 count were prognostic for all-cause, AIDS, and non-AIDS mortality in virologically suppressed patients with high CD4 count. Methods. We used data from 13 European and North American cohorts of human immunodeficiency virus-infected, antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive adults who started ART during 1996-2010, who were followed from the date they had CD4 count >= 350 cells/mu L and were virologically suppressed (baseline). We used stratified Cox models to estimate unadjusted and adjusted (for sex, people who inject drugs, ART initiation year, and baseline age, CD4 count, AIDS, duration of ART) all-cause and cause-specific mortality hazard ratios for tertiles of CD4: CD8 ratio (0-0.40, 0.41-0.64 [reference], >0.64) and CD8 count (0-760, 761-1138 [reference], >1138 cells/mu L) and examined the shape of associations using cubic splines. Results. During 276 526 person-years, 1834 of 49 865 patients died (249 AIDS-related; 1076 non-AIDS-defining; 509 unknown/unclassifiable deaths). There was little evidence that CD4: CD8 ratio was prognostic for all-cause mortality after adjustment for other factors: the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for lower vs middle tertile was 1.11 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.25). The association of CD8 count with all-cause mortality was U-shaped: aHR for higher vs middle tertile was 1.13 (95% CI, 1.01-1.26). AIDS-related mortality declined with increasing CD4: CD8 ratio and decreasing CD8 count. There was little evidence that CD4: CD8 ratio or CD8 count was prognostic for non-AIDS mortality. Conclusions. In this large cohort collaboration, the magnitude of adjusted associations of CD4: CD8 ratio or CD8 count with mortality was too small for them to be useful as independent prognostic markers in virally suppressed patients on ART.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available