| Literature DB >> 26223795 |
Mark K Webale, Mark W Kilongosi1, Valentine Budambula2, Raphael Lihana3, Francis O Musumba4, Anthony K Nyamache5, Nancy L M Budambula6, Aabid A Ahmed7, Collins Ouma8,9, Tom Were10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Information about HBV sero-markers, infection stages and genotypes in HIV-1 infected and uninfected injection and non-injection drug users (IDUs) in Kenya remains elusive.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26223795 PMCID: PMC4520198 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-015-1060-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Baseline characteristics of the study participants
| Non-drug users | Non-injection drug users | Injection drug users | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Females, n (%) | 114 (58.8) | 19 (39.6) | 84 (60.4) | 14 (6.5) | 86 (54.8) | <0.0001 |
| Age, yrs. | 30.8 (12.8) | 30.4 (11.8) | 36.0 (14.5)a,b | 31.7 (9.1) | 30.6 (6.5) | <0.0001 |
| CD4+ T cells/μL | 831 (513) | 809 (486) | 553 (479)a,b,c | 905 (641) | 456 (449)a,b,c | <0.0001 |
Data shown are number (n) and proportions (%) of subjects for gender and medians (IQR, interquartile range) for age and CD4+ T cell counts. Statistical comparison of proportions among groups was conducted by Chi-Square test. Age and CD4+ T cell comparisons across groups were performed using Kruskal Wallis test followed by Dunn’s post-hoc test for multiple comparisons. HIV-1(+), human immunodeficiency virus-1 infected, HIV-1(−) uninfected. a P < 0.001 vs. non-drug users; b P < 0.001 vs. HIV-1(−) non-injection drug users; and c P < 0.001 vs. HIV-1(−) injection drug users
Hepatitis B virus sero-reactivities, infection stages and genotypes in the study participants
| Non-drug users | Non-injection drug users | Injection drug users | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||
| HBsAg | 5 (2.6) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (3.6) | 5 (2.3) | 15 (9.6) | 0.002 |
| HBsAb | 16 (8.2) | 7 (14.6) | 12 (8.6) | 36 (16.8) | 13 (8.3) | 0.023 |
| HBeAg | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (0.7) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | - |
| HBeAb | 13 (6.7) | 3 (6.3) | 13 (9.4) | 26 (12.1) | 21 (13.4) | 0.186 |
| HBcAb-IgM | 9 (4.6) | 1 (2.1) | 9 (6.5) | 7 (3.3) | 16 (10.2) | 0.038 |
|
| ||||||
| 1 | 3 (1.5) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (1.4) | 9 (5.7) | - |
| 2 | 3 (1.5) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (3.6) | 2 (0.9) | 8 (5.1) | - |
| 3 | 11 (5.7) | 5 (10.4) | 9 (6.5) | 33 (15.4) | 10 (6.4) | 0.003 |
| 4 | 13 (6.7) | 3 (6.3) | 10 (7.2) | 24 (11.2) | 13 (8.3) | 0.479 |
| 5 | 164 (84.5) | 40 (83.3) | 115 (82.7) | 152 (71.0) | 117 (74.5) | 0.005 |
|
| ||||||
| A1 | 6 (3.1) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (2.2) | 4 (1.9) | 10 (6.4) | - |
Data shown are number (n) and proportions (%) of subjects. HIV-1(+), human immunodeficiency virus-1 infected, HIV-1(−) uninfected. HBsAg, hepatitis B surface antigen; HBsAb, hepatitis B surface antibody; HBeAg, hepatitis B e-antigen; HBeAb, hepatitis B e-antibody; HBcAb-IgM, hepatitis B core antibody Immunoglobulin M. Statistical comparison was performed using Pearson’s Chi-square test where appropriate. Hepatitis B sero-marker test results were used to categorize hepatitis B virus infection status in to five (1–5) infection stages based on previous classifications [4, 5, 42, 43] as follows: 1 = Acute (HBsAg+, HBsAb-, HBeAg+/−, HBeAb-, HBcAb-IgM+/−); 2 = Chronic (HBsAg+, HBsAb+/−, HBeAg+/−, HBeAb+, HBcAb-IgM+/−); 3 = Vaccine type response (HBsAg-, HBsAb+, HBeAg-, HBeAb-, HBcAb-IgM-); 4 = Past, resolved or occult infection (HBsAg-, HBsAb+/−, HBeAg-, HBeAb+/−, HBcAb-IgM+/−); 5 = Uninfected (HBsAg-, HBsAb-, HBeAg-, HBeAb-, HBcAb-IgM-)
Fig. 1Phylogenetic tree of HBV isolates. Neighbour-Joining method based on 1000 bootstrap replicates and p-distances were used for generating the phylogenetic tree [23]. HBV genotype sequences from GenBank together with their country of origin and accession numbers are presented. Wooly monkey HBV (AY226578-WMHBV) was used as the out-group. Relevant bootstrap values are indicated. HBV isolates from study participants are indicated by diamond signs. The scale bar represents genetic distance