| Literature DB >> 18776933 |
Hemant Kulkarni1, Brian K Agan, Vincent C Marconi, Robert J O'Connell, Jose F Camargo, Weijing He, Judith Delmar, Kenneth R Phelps, George Crawford, Robert A Clark, Matthew J Dolan, Sunil K Ahuja.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Whether vexing clinical decision-making dilemmas can be partly addressed by recent advances in genomics is unclear. For example, when to initiate highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) during HIV-1 infection remains a clinical dilemma. This decision relies heavily on assessing AIDS risk based on the CD4+ T cell count and plasma viral load. However, the trajectories of these two laboratory markers are influenced, in part, by polymorphisms in CCR5, the major HIV coreceptor, and the gene copy number of CCL3L1, a potent CCR5 ligand and HIV-suppressive chemokine. Therefore, we determined whether accounting for both genetic and laboratory markers provided an improved means of assessing AIDS risk. METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18776933 PMCID: PMC2522281 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003165
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
The likelihood ratio (LR) and pre- and post-test probability of developing AIDS according to the laboratory markers and CCL3L1-CCR5 GRGs.
| Unstratified by GRG | Stratified by GRG | ||||
| Low GRG | Moderate GRG | High GRG | |||
| CD4 or Viral load strata | N | LR (95% CI) [pre-test, post-test] | LR (95% CI) [pre-test, post-test] | LR (95% CI) [pre-test, post-test] | LR (95% CI) [pre-test, post-test] |
| CD4+ T cells (cells/mm3) | |||||
| <350 | 186 | 2.44 (1.87–3.19) [39%, 61%] | 0.69 (0.51–0.93) [61%, 52%] | 1.01 (0.71–1.45) [61%, 62%] | 13.3 (1.83–96.3) [61%, 95%] |
| ≥350 | 916 | 0.83 (0.78–0.88) [39%, 35%] | 0.74 (0.64–0.86) [35%, 28%] | 1.22 (1.04–1.42) [35%, 40%] | 2.34 (1.45–3.77) [35%, 56%] |
| 350–699 | 566 | 1.04 (0.92–1.16) [39%, 40%] | 0.78 (0.65–0.94) [40%, 34%] | 1.12 (0.94–1.35) [40%, 43%] | 2.23 (1.24–4.02) [40%, 60%] |
| ≥700 | 350 | 0.55 (0.45–0.67) [39%, 26%] | 0.70 (0.54–0.91) [26%, 20%] | 1.35 (1.03–1.78) [26%, 32%] | 2.40 (1.03–5.60) [26%, 46%] |
| Viral load | |||||
| ≥55 k | 95 | 2.22 (1.57–3.13) [27%, 45%] | 0.73 (0.44–1.20) [45%, 37%] | 1.06 (0.66–1.68) [45%, 46%] | 2.33 (0.76–7.20) [45%, 66%] |
| <55 k | 310 | 0.74 (0.64–0.87) [27%, 22%] | 0.69 (0.51–0.93) [22%, 16%] | 1.31 (0.96–1.81) [22%, 27%] | 3.19 (1.28–7.95) [22%, 47%] |
| CD4 plus viral load | |||||
| ≥350 and <55 k | 270 | 0.64 (0.52–0.79) [27%, 19%] | 0.70 (0.50–0.97) [19%, 14%] | 1.27 (0.88–1.83) [19%, 23%] | 3.28 (1.28–8.39) [19%, 43%] |
| All subjects | 1103 | 0.73 (0.64–0.83) [39%, 32%] | 1.16 (1.01–1.34) [39%, 43%] | 3.02 (1.96–4.64) [39%, 66%] | |
The unstratified analyses are posttest and LR estimates for the baseline CD4+ T cell count and steady-state viral load prior to accounting for a subject's GRG and are in the column denoted as “unstratified by GRG”, whereas similar estimates for the GRGs before accounting for a subject's baseline CD4 cell count and steady-state viral load are in the bottom-most row.
Data are for the entire cohort.
Data are for seroconverting subjects and indicates the steady-state viral load in these subjects. k, denotes×103 copies/ml.
The percentages in the brackets [ ] denote the pre-test followed by the post-test probability of developing AIDS.
Annual incidence of AIDS (%) and numbers needed-to-treat according to baseline CD4+ T cell count, the steady-state viral load and CCL3L1-CCR5 GRG, based on Poisson regression model.
| GRG | CD4≥700 | CD4 350–699 | CD4<350 | ||||||
| Viral load | Viral load | Viral load | |||||||
| <20 k | 20-<55 k | ≥55 k | <20 k | 20-<55 k | ≥55 k | <20 k | 20-<55 k | ≥55 k | |
| Annual Incidence of AIDS | |||||||||
| All patients (N = 402) | |||||||||
| Low | 1.6 | 3.3 | 4.6 | 2.0 | 4.2 | 5.9 | 3.4 | 7.1 | 9.9 |
| Moderate | 2.3 | 4.7 | 6.6 | 2.9 | 6.0 | 8.3 | 4.9 | 10.1 | 14.1 |
| High | 4.8 | 9.8 | 13.7 | 6.0 | 12.4 | 17.3 | 10.2 | 20.8 | 29.1 |
| Patients not in HAART era (N = 97) | |||||||||
| Low | 4.3 | 7.3 | 11.9 | 4.8 | 8.1 | 13.3 | 8.8 | 15.0 | 24.5 |
| Moderate | 5.3 | 9.1 | 14.9 | 5.9 | 10.2 | 16.6 | 11.0 | 18.7 | 30.6 |
| High | 9.1 | 15.5 | 25.4 | 10.1 | 17.3 | 28.4 | 18.7 | 31.9 | 52.3 |
| Patients in HAART era (N = 305) | |||||||||
| Low | 1.1 | 2.1 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 2.9 | 3.2 | 3.6 | 6.9 | 7.7 |
| Moderate | 1.6 | 3.0 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 4.1 | 4.6 | 5.2 | 9.8 | 10.9 |
| High | 2.8 | 5.4 | 6.0 | 3.9 | 7.3 | 8.2 | 9.2 | 17.5 | 19.6 |
| Numbers needed-to-treat | |||||||||
| Low | 32 | 19 | 10 | 31 | 10 | 10 | 19 | 12 | 6 |
| Moderate | 27 | 16 | 9 | 26 | 16 | 8 | 17 | 11 | 5 |
| High | 16 | 10 | 5 | 16 | 10 | 5 | 11 | 7 | 3 |
Results are from the seroconverting component of the cohort. CD4 cell count (baseline) is in cells/mm3. k, denotes×103 copies/ml. The assignment of subjects whose membership in the WHMC cohort fell in the eras in which HAART was available or not, and the impact of the HAART era on rates of disease progression are as described previously [20].
Figure 1Prognostic performance of the CCL3L1-CCR5 GRGs in risk-scoring systems.
Panel A shows the three risk-scoring systems based on baseline CD4+ T cell counts (C), viral load (V) and GRGs (G) in the seroconverting and separately in the seroprevalent component of the WHMC HIV+ cohort. Panels B–C, F–G and J–K depict Kaplan Meier (KM) plots for progression to AIDS (1987 criteria) before and after accounting for the GRGs in the risk-scoring systems indicated on the left axis. The critical ratio χ2 values are indicated within the KM plots. Panels D, H and L depict likelihood ratio χ2 and AIC estimates in seroconverters, and panels E, I and M depict the same estimates for the seroprevalent subjects.
Figure 2Classification trees and their application in the seroconverting component of the WHMC HIV+ cohort.
(A) A binary decision tree derived by CART analysis for the risk of developing AIDS (1987 criteria) based on baseline CD4+ T cell counts, viral load (VL) and GRG status in the seroconverting component of the WHMC HIV+ cohort. The analysis identified five exclusive groups designated as Groups A to E. The tree shows that the proximal split was based on the CD4 cell count, and the CART analysis generated the cut-off to be 453 cells/mm3. The next split was based on a viral load of 17,500 copies/ml. The third split was based on GRG status, followed by another split at a viral load of 55,500 copies/ml. The five groups generated are color-coded and the number of subjects in each of these groups is shown along with their proportion in the study group. The values in brackets ([ ]) indicate the relative hazard estimates corresponding to each of these groups as shown in Figure 2F. (B) Pie charts depicting the proportion of subjects in each of the splits who did or did not develop AIDS (1987 criteria). Within each pie-chart, the dark pie-slice represents the proportion of subjects who developed AIDS. Yes and no refers to whether a subject does or does not categorize, respectively, to the indicated node. (C) KM plots for the rate of progression to AIDS from time of seroconversion based on the split at each corresponding node in the decision tree shown in panel A. The significance values shown below each KM plot were estimated using the logrank test. (D–F) Association between the five risk groups (panel D) generated by CART and the risk (panel E) and rate of developing AIDS (panel F). Panel D defines the risk groups based on the baseline CD4 (cells/mm3), steady state viral load (k, ×1,000 copies/ml), and GRG status (M/H, moderate or high GRG; Low, low GRG). Gp, group. Panel E shows the probability (Prob) of developing AIDS within each risk group generated by CART analysis. “Overall” refers to the probability of developing AIDS in the seroconverting component of the cohort without accounting for the laboratory or genetic markers. ΔP, change in probability from the overall probability. Panel F shows the KM plots for rate of progression to AIDS for the five groups of subjects identified by CART. The table to the right shows the relative hazards (RH) corresponding to these five groups estimated by using Cox proportional hazards models. In these analyses, the reference category (RH = 1) is group B, which denotes subjects that have a CD4 of ≥453 cells/mm3 and a viral load of <17,500 copies/ml. The results show that relative to this reference category, groups A, C and E are associated with a significantly increased risk of progressing rapidly to AIDS. (G–I) Similar analyses to those shown in panels D to F but using risk groups in which the GRGs are not included as prognosticators. In these analyses, the risk groups A and B shown in panel A and panel D were used along with two new groups designated as group F and group G. The latter two groups were derived from the Groups C to E shown in panel D by not accounting for the GRG status and dichotomizing the cohort further based on a viral load cut-off of 55,500 copies/ml. Reference category (RH = 1) is group B. In panels E and H, prob refers to probability.
Figure 3CCL3L1-CCR5 GRGs influence median time-from-seroconversion to CD4 cell count thresholds that might be used to guide initiation of HAART, and time from a high to a low CD4 cell count.
In Panel A, KM plots show the time-from-seroconversion to arrival at <450 (left), <350 (center) or <200 (right) CD-cells/mm3. In Panel B, the KM plots are for progression from <450 to <200 CD4-cells/mm3 in all seroconverters (left) or seroconverters recruited and followed during the years 1990 to 1999, a time-period in which antiretroviral therapy was available (right). The color codes for the KM plots in panel B are: blue, low GRG; brown, moderate and high GRGs combined into a single category; and black, all subjects. Overall P values are at the top of each plot. Color-coded numbers at the upper right of the KM plots represent the median time-to-event, that is, from seroconversion to the indicated CD4 cell count. In panel A, P values for differences in median time-to-event relative to those with a low GRG were: *, 0.1131; †, 0.0089; ‡, 0.0030; §, 0.0005; ¶, 0.0001; and ∥, 9.6×10−7. RH, relative hazard; CI, confidence interval. P values in Panel B are adjusted for the steady-state viral load, baseline CD4 and best DTH response recorded during disease course, and subjects with a moderate or high GRG were combined into a single category.