Literature DB >> 28918411

Combining CD4 recovery and CD4: CD8 ratio restoration as an indicator for evaluating the outcome of continued antiretroviral therapy: an observational cohort study.

Shui Shan Lee1, Ngai Sze Wong1,2, Bonnie Chun Kwan Wong3, Ka Hing Wong3, Kenny Chi Wai Chan3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Immune recovery following highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) is commonly assessed by the degree of CD4 reconstitution alone. In this study, we aimed to assess immune recovery by incorporating both CD4 count and CD4:CD8 ratio.
DESIGN: Observational cohort study SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Clinical data from Chinese HIV-positive patients attending the largest HIV service in Hong Kong and who had been on HAART for ≥4 years were accessed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Optimal immune outcome was defined as a combination of a CD4 count ≥500/μL and a CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8.
RESULTS: A total of 718 patients were included for analysis (6353 person-years). At the end of year 4, 318 out of 715 patients achieved CD4 ≥500/μL, of which only 33% (105 out of 318) concurrently achieved CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8. Patients with a pre-HAART CD8 ≤800/μL (428 out of 704) were more likely to be optimal immune outcome achievers with CD4 ≥500/μL and CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8, the association of which was stronger after adjusting for pre-HAART CD4 counts. In a multivariable logistic model, optimal immune outcome was positively associated with male gender, younger pre-HAART age and higher pre-HAART CD4 count, longer duration of HAART and pre-HAART CD8 ≤800/μL. Treatment regimen and cumulative viral loads played no significant role in the pattern of immune recovery.
CONCLUSIONS: A combination of CD4 count and CD4:CD8 ratio could be a useful approach for the characterisation of treatment outcome over time, on top of monitoring CD4 count alone. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CD4; CD4:CD8 ratio; CD8; antiretroviral therapy; immune outcome

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28918411      PMCID: PMC5640103          DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016886

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Open        ISSN: 2044-6055            Impact factor:   2.692


The combined use of CD4 and CD4:CD8 ratio as an outcome measure offers a new perspective for measuring immune recovery following antiretroviral therapy. The combined marker could avoid overestimation of treatment performance in patients with CD4 count but low CD4:CD8 ratio. The study was limited by not having included clinical events in the analysis, a gap which should be filled in larger scale cohort studies.

Introduction

Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) forms the cornerstone of modern-day treatment of HIV infection. In monitoring treatment outcome, peripheral blood CD4+ lymphocyte (hereafter referred as CD4) count measurement is widely used, the results of which feature a rapid rise in the first 3–6 months followed by a second phase of gradual increase, plateauing 4–6 years afterwards.1 Nadir CD4 counts and advanced age are associated with poorer CD4 recovery, a well-reported phenomenon that has been reviewed in the literature.1 2 While high and persistently elevated CD8+ lymphocytes (hereafter referred as CD8) are commonly observed in chronically HIV-infected patients, relatively little attention has been paid to its impact on immunological recovery.3 A large cohort study suggested that markedly elevated CD8 count at HAART initiation was associated with a poor increase in CD4 count.4 Host factors aside, virus burden exerted by HIV could also impact immunological recovery. In the absence of timely and effective HAART, HIV cumulates over time leading to a state of cumulative viraemia, a predictor of suboptimal immunological outcome in primary HIV infection.5 Separate studies have shown that high cumulative viral load was a potential marker for progression to AIDS in chronic HIV infection.6 Despite effective therapy, some 20%–30% of patients were unable to achieve optimal immunological recovery,1 7 an outcome resulting from the interaction of a good range of host and viral factors, as well as coinfection with other pathogens, notably hepatitis C virus (HCV).3 Over the last decade, a CD4-guided approach to treatment initiation has gradually been replaced by early initiation of HAART irrespective of baseline CD4 level.8 Achievement of a high CD4 count of, say, over 500/μL remains a commonly used marker of immune restoration. Knowingly, prompt treatment and full viral suppression do not imply freedom from comorbidities, as HIV disease is also characterised by a state of immune activation, with the emergence of non-AIDS morbidity and mortality.9 This morbid state of immune activation cannot be inferred from the pattern of CD4 recovery alone. Failure of CD4/CD8 normalisation following HAART has however been linked to this scenario of immune activation.10 11 Low CD4:CD8 ratio was observed in patients despite high CD4 level (>500/μL).12 A high CD8 count following HAART was shown to be associated with inflammatory non-AIDS-related clinical events, and in fact a higher risk of myocardial infarction has been reported.4 13 Apparently, a target CD4 count is inadequate for reflecting effective immune recovery. Concurrent rise of the CD4:CD8 ratio is increasingly recognised as an important marker of immune reconstitution.10 14 To better monitor immunological recovery following HAART, new biomarkers are needed, which should preferably be derived from routinely collected laboratory data. Optimal outcome could be founded on CD4/CD8 normalisation on top of the regularly monitored CD4 count. In this study, we define HAART-associated immune recovery by a combination of CD4 outcome and CD4/CD8 restoration. We set out to examine its predictors by analysing regularly collected viral load and immunological data, the latter including CD8 count, in a cohort of patients with HIV following HAART.

Methods

Anonymous clinical data from Integrated Treatment Centre, the largest HIV clinical service in Hong Kong, were accessed for this observational study. Data access approval was granted by the Department of Health, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government in compliance with the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance. Individual consent for the study was waived following approval of the Joint Chinese University of Hong Kong–New Territories East Cluster Clinical Research Ethics Committee. Patients with HIV aged ≥18 diagnosed in 1985–2012, on HAART continuously for ≥4 years without treatment interruption, with at least one CD4 measurement during treatment and with viral load fully suppressed (without consecutive viral load >500 copies/mL in the first 4 years on treatment) were selected. We included patients who were treatment naïve or have been on non-standard treatment for <1 year before HAART initiation. Data retrieved were: (A) CD4 and CD8 counts at diagnosis, before HAART initiation and 3–4 months subsequently, (B) viral load levels at the respective time points, (C) AIDS diagnosis and the timing, as appropriate, (D) antiretroviral treatment date and regimens, differentiated as protease inhibitor (PI) or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) based as other regimens were rarely used for treatment-naïve patients. Estimated cumulative viral load was expressed as years×log10 copies/mL, in accordance with the method reported by Zoufaly et al 15 with modifications. Patients with available negative HIV testing result within 3 years before HIV diagnosis were included, so that one’s seroconversion date could be estimated with confidence.16 In brief, the products of the log10 viral load were summed from estimated seroconversion to subsequent specified time point(s), with the computation of the highest viral load for the undiagnosed interval and an upward adjustment by 1 log10 for the presumed primary infection period. The time of seroconversion was determined as the midpoint between last negative and first positive HIV antibody testing dates. On the other hand, optimal immune outcome was defined as the achievement of a CD4 count of ≥500/μL and a CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.817 while conventional outcome was defined as achieving CD4 count of ≥500/μL but not CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8 within specific time. Late HIV diagnosis was defined as the diagnosis of AIDS within 3 months of HIV diagnosis. The latest CD4 and CD8 measurements ≤30 days before HAART initiation were used as the baseline. Comparisons between pre-HAART CD8 >800/μL vs ≤800/μL were made by OR and multivariable logistic regression with pre-HAART CD4 as confounder, while correlation coefficients were calculated to test the associations between CD4 and CD8 before and 4 years after HAART. The CD8 threshold was adopted by taking reference from the criteria of high CD8 count (ie, over 800/μL) during primary infection reported in another study.18 CD4 (maximum value), CD8 (minimum value) and CD4:CD8 ratio (maximum value) of patients achieving optimal immune outcome and conventional outcome by year 4 on HAART over time (≤12 months, 12.1–24 months, …, >96 months) were compared in generalised estimating equations (GEE). Multivariable logistic regression model (stepwise) was applied to examine the predictors of optimal immune outcome and conventional outcome. Complete case analysis was performed. Loss to follow-up and death were data end points. Statistical tests were performed in SPSS 21.

Results

As of the end of 2012, data of 2974 diagnosed adults were accessed. Of these, 718 eligible treatment-naïve diagnosed cases who had been on HAART continuously for ≥4 years were included in the study. Their case records contained 18 857 clinical measurements (18 693 CD4, 18 521 CD8 and/or 17 776 viral load measurements) at multiple time points spanning over 6353 person-years’ follow-up. General characteristics of the study population are displayed in table 1. Overall, a majority (84%) were male with a median age at diagnosis of 37 years (IQR: 31–45 years). The median interval from diagnosis to the latest assessment was 100 months (IQR=74–141 months). Most were infected by either HIV-1 subtype B (31%) or CRF01_AE (38%), with men who have sex with men (MSM) accounting for 39% of the study population. The pre-HAART median CD4 and CD8 counts were 109/μL and 673/μL, respectively, which were positively correlated (Pearson correlation coefficient r=0.50, p<0.001) (see online supplementary figure 1d). The distribution of CD4 and CD4:CD8 ratio at baseline before initiation of HAART is shown in online supplementary table 1a. The lifetime estimated cumulative viral load at the last assessment increased with the interval between seroconversion and HAART initiation (r=0.94, p<0.001).
Table 1

General characteristics of study population (n=718)

Frequency%
Median(IQR)
(a) Demographics
Male gender60584%
Ethnicity
 Chinese58181%
 Asian (Asian other than Chinese)8712%
 White477%
 African30.4%
 Age (years, at HIV diagnosis) 37 (31–45)
(b) HIV infection and diagnosis
Mode of transmission
 Heterosexual39455%
 Man-to-man sex28039%
 Injection drug use345%
 Contaminated blood transfusion61%
 Undetermined41%
HIV-1 subtype
 CRF01_AE27038%
 B22431%
 C81%
 Others314%
 Unavailable18526%
AIDS diagnosis before treatment23933%
Late HIV diagnosis*19227%
Estimated cumulative viral load† from seroconversion to diagnosis (n=199) 8 (3–18)
(c) Pre-HAART status
Age (years) 39 (33–46)
Months from diagnosis to treatment initiation 8.67 (2.75–33.13)
CD4 count (cells/µL) 109 (29–190)
CD4:CD8 ratio‡ 0.14 (0.06–0.23)
CD8 count (cells/µL)‡ 673 (441–966)
Viral load (log10 copies/mL)§  5.15 (4.62–5.58)
Estimated cumulative viral load† from seroconversion to treatment initiation (n=199) 18 (11–29)
(d) Antiretroviral treatment and clinical outcomes
First HAART regimen
 NNRTI based18225%
 PI based13118%
 PI based with booster39755%
 Non-standard81%
Total treatment duration (months) 85.38 (63.39–117.32)
AIDS free during treatment (n=479)45695%
Highest CD4 count within 4 years¶ 476 (354–630)
Highest CD4:CD8 ratio within 4 years** 0.55 (0.39–0.76)
CD4 count ≥500/μL within 4 years¶31844%
CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8 within 4 years††14520%
 Deceased395%

*Late HIV diagnosis refers to the diagnosis of AIDS within 3 months of HIV diagnosis.

†Estimated cumulative viral load expressed as years×log10 viral load copies/mL.

‡14 missing values.

§18 missing values.

¶2 missing values.

**8 missing values.

††3 missing values.

HAART, highly active antiretroviral therapy; NNRTI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor; PI, protease inhibitor.

General characteristics of study population (n=718) *Late HIV diagnosis refers to the diagnosis of AIDS within 3 months of HIV diagnosis. †Estimated cumulative viral load expressed as years×log10 viral load copies/mL. ‡14 missing values. §18 missing values. ¶2 missing values. **8 missing values. ††3 missing values. HAART, highly active antiretroviral therapy; NNRTI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor; PI, protease inhibitor. During the study period, a CD4-guided approach was in place, implying that HAART was recommended when one’s CD4 count fell below 350/μL. A majority of the patients (74%) had been started on a PI-based regimen with 25% on NNRTI-based regimen, and 1% had been started on non-standard regimen subsequently changed to HAART within 1 year. Integrase inhibitors (INSTI) had not been used as a component of one’s first regimen, but three patients had changed to raltegravir-based regimen afterwards (table 1). The median treatment duration was 85.38 months (IQR: 63.39–117.32). As of the end of a 4-year observation period, the CD4 count of 318 patients (44%) had reached 500/μL or above, of which 105 (33%) gave a CD4:CD8 ratio of ≥0.8 concurrently, while 205 (64%) patients reached the CD4 target but not the ratio. On the other hand, 145 patients reached the optimal ratio, of which 32 (22%) patients could not reach the CD4 target (table 2). The temporal changes of CD4 count, CD8 count and CD4:CD8 ratio over time are shown in figure 1, while distribution of CD4 and CD4:CD8 ratio at the end of year 4 is shown in online  supplementary table 1b. Whereas both CD4 count (figure 1A) and CD4:CD8 ratio (figure 1C) showed a steady rise from the first time point following HAART, the temporal pattern of CD8 counts was inconspicuous (figure 1B). Patients with optimal immune outcome had significantly higher median CD4 and CD4:CD8 ratio but lower CD8 count than those only with satisfactory CD4 recovery (conventional outcome) in all time points (GEE model results in online supplementary table 2 supplementary table 1). The CD4 count at year 4 was positively correlated with pre-HAART CD4 (r=0.38, p<0.001) (see online supplementary figure 1a). Categorised by one’s pre-HAART CD8 count, about half (n=428, 61%) had a lower count of ≤800/μL. The two groups had similar demographic, cumulative viral load levels and had received similar treatment regimens. The CD4 count at year 4 was positively correlated with pre-HAART CD8 count (r=0.18, p<0.001) (see online supplementary figure 1b) whereas the latter was also positively correlated with CD8 at year 4 (r=0.35, p<0.001) (see online supplementary figure 1c). After adjusting for pre-HAART CD4, patients with lower pre-HAART CD8 had a higher chance of achieving a higher CD4:CD8 ratio at year 4 (adjusted OR (aOR)=64.63, 95% CI 23.47 to 177.98) (table 3). Likewise, a low pre-HAART CD8 count of ≤800/μL was associated with the optimal immune outcome at year 4, with an increased odds (aOR=5.07, 95% CI 2.74 to 9.41) after adjusting for pre-HAART CD4. There was no significant correlation between year 4 CD8 and pre-HAART CD4 (see online supplementary figure 1e), but positive association between CD4 and CD8 at year 4 (r=0.33, p<0.001) could be demonstrated (see online supplementary figure 1f).
Table 2

The profiles of immunological outcomes of patients by achievement of none, one or both of the two target immunological markers (CD4 ≥500, CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8) before the end of a 4-year observation period*

NumberMedian peak or highest CD4 count (/μL) (IQR)Median months to CD4 target (IQR)Median peak or highest CD4:CD8 ratio (IQR)Median months to target CD4:CD8 ratio (IQR)
CD4 ≥500/μL and CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8105741 (618–876)20.63 (12.6–30.53)0.98 (0.86–1.2)28.90 (14.43–42.95)
Concurrent achievement of both targets15694 (569–1182)20.27 (13.07–28.17)1.05 (0.9–1.49)20.27 (13.07–28.17)
CD4 target before ratio target57788 (660–921)15.13 (8.7–22.88)0.89 (0.83–0.99)39.23 (30.78–45.98)
Ratio target before CD4 target33650 (547–764)31.13 (22.3–39.4)1.17 (1.02–1.56)14.40 (8.68–24.08)
CD4 ≥500/μL only205622 (552–723)29.10 (17.43–38.37)0.59 (0.49–0.69)
Ratio ≥0.8 only32431 (369–475)1.05 (0.89–1.17)29.32 (18.48–40.33)
CD4 target then changed to ratio target4588 (519–660)20.02 (12.23–35.36)0.86 (0.81–0.95)36.83 (20.68–49.72)
Ratio target then changed to CD4 target4583 (521–636)29.68 (20.52–40.38)0.87 (0.86–1.01)13.87 (5.48–25.45)
Failure to achieve both targets365362 (253–432)0.43 (0.31–0.55)

*Equivalent to a maximum of <52 months with the inclusion of a 3-month buffer period.

Figure 1

Yearly changes of (A) CD4 count, (B) CD8 count and (C) CD4:CD8 ratio from HAART initiation to 6 years afterwards.  HAART, highly active antiretroviral therapy.

Table 3

Comparison between patients with high (>800/μL) and low (≤800/μL) pre-HAART CD8 counts. Variables included in the analyses were (a) general baseline characteristics, (b) pre-HAART virological status, (c) antiretroviral therapy and (d) outcome at year 4

Pre-HAART CD8 >800 (n=276)Pre-HAART CD8 ≤800 (n=428)Univariate analysisAdjusted by pre-HAART CD4
Median/numberIQR/%Median/numberIQR/%OR95% CIaOR95% CI
(a) Baseline characteristics
Male gender24287.7%35282.2%0.650.42 to 1.011.821.12 to 2.96*
Chinese ethnicity22280.4%35182.0%1.110.75 to 1.631.100.71 to 1.71
Mode of transmission(n=372)(n=427)
 MSM12044.0%15335.8%RefRef
 Heterosexual14051.3%24958.3%1.391.02 to 1.91*0.930.65 to 1.33
 Injection drug user134.8%194.4%1.150.54 to 2.410.470.21 to 1.08
 Contaminated blood transfusion00.0%61.4%
Subtype(n=206)(n=322)
 CRF01_AE9546.1%17153.1%RefRef
 B9445.6%12940.1%0.760.53 to 1.11.350.88 to 2.06
 C41.9%41.2%0.560.14 to 2.271.130.25 to 5.07
 Others136.3%185.6%0.770.36 to 1.641.370.6 to 3.17
Age at diagnosis (years)36.8031.74–43.5437.4630.27–45.171.000.98 to 1.010.990.98 to 1.01
Late HIV diagnosis4817.4%13832.2%2.261.56 to 3.28*0.980.64 to 1.51
AIDS before treatment6623.9%16839.3%2.061.47 to 2.88*0.940.63 to 1.41
(b) Pre-HAART virological status
Viral load (log10 copies/mL)(n=274)(n=420)
5.044.55–5.525.204.69–5.581.231.03 to 1.47*0.800.64 to 0.99*
Viral load log10 >514552.9%25961.7%1.431.05 to 1.95*0.710.49 to 1.02
Estimated cumulative viral load (n=96)(n=101)
17.7410.00–29.6118.5310.88–27.731.0040.98 to 1.031.0040.98 to 1.03
(c) Antiretroviral treatment
Months from diagnosis to HAART initiation12.803.87–35.525.602.44–30.581.000.99 to 11.011 to 1.01*
NNRTI-based initial regimen7025.4%10524.5%0.960.67 to 1.361.841.22 to 2.78*
(d) Outcome at year 4
CD4 count/μL(n=246)(n=370)
488386–625437332–5890.9990.998 to 11.0010.9997 to 1.002
CD4 >500/μL11747.6%14138.1%0.680.49 to 0.94*1.290.88 to 1.91
CD4:CD8 ratio(n=246)(n=370)
0.490.36–0.680.570.41–0.793.611.93 to 6.75*64.6323.47 to 177.98*
Viral load (log10 copies/mL)(n=245)(n=366)
1.881.88–2.61.881.88–2.61.180.73 to 1.910.830.48 to 1.44
Suppressed viral load (≤500 copies/mL)245100.0%36499.5%
CD4 >500/μL and CD4:CD8 ratio >0.8(n=243)(n=370)
249.9%5915.9%1.731.04 to 2.87*5.072.74 to 9.41*
Treatment (months)83.8362.13–117.4285.0564.17–116.751.0000.997 to 1.0040.9990.99 to 1.003

All analyses were performed in logistic regression: simple logistic regression for univariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression with selected confounders for multivariable analyses.

*p<0.05.

†Estimated cumulative viral load from seroconversion expressed as years×log10 viral load copies/mL. 

aOR, adjusted OR; HAART, highly active antiretroviral therapy; MSM, men who have sex with men; NNRTI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor.

Yearly changes of (A) CD4 count, (B) CD8 count and (C) CD4:CD8 ratio from HAART initiation to 6 years afterwards.  HAART, highly active antiretroviral therapy. The profiles of immunological outcomes of patients by achievement of none, one or both of the two target immunological markers (CD4 ≥500, CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8) before the end of a 4-year observation period* *Equivalent to a maximum of <52 months with the inclusion of a 3-month buffer period. Comparison between patients with high (>800/μL) and low (≤800/μL) pre-HAART CD8 counts. Variables included in the analyses were (a) general baseline characteristics, (b) pre-HAART virological status, (c) antiretroviral therapy and (d) outcome at year 4 All analyses were performed in logistic regression: simple logistic regression for univariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression with selected confounders for multivariable analyses. *p<0.05. †Estimated cumulative viral load from seroconversion expressed as years×log10 viral load copies/mL. aOR, adjusted OR; HAART, highly active antiretroviral therapy; MSM, men who have sex with men; NNRTI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor. The following independent variables were then tested for their prediction of optimal immune outcome and conventional outcome achieved since treatment initiation throughout the observation period: pre-HAART CD4, pre-HAART CD8, pre-HAART age, treatment duration and male gender. In the final model, both high pre-HAART CD4 and low pre-HAART CD8 were significant predictors of optimal immune outcome, while only the former was a significant predictor of conventional outcome (table 4). Patients who were male and started HAART at younger age were more likely to achieve both outcomes. Patients on treatment for longer time (≥97 months) had higher odds to achieve optimal immune outcome (aOR=3.34, 95% CI 2.17 to 5.15, 49–72 months as reference) than conventional outcome (aOR=2.78, 95% CI 1.89 to 4.09, 49–72 months as reference). As a substudy (results not shown), we have performed another set of GEE models with cumulative viral load as an independent variable (results not shown). The results did not support it as a significant predictor of an optimal immune outcome both in CD4 count and CD4:CD8 ratio, though the number of patients eligible for the analyses was only 187.
Table 4

Multivariable logistic regression for evaluating variables associated with an optimal immunological outcome and conventional outcome

Optimal immune outcomeConventional outcome
aOR95% CIaOR95% CI
Male gender2.231.4 to 3.53*1.811.11 to 2.96*
Age at HAART initiation0.980.97 to 0.9996*0.960.94 to 0.97*
Pre-HAART CD4 (/μL)
 ≤100RefRef
 101–2002.911.83 to 4.62*2.301.57 to 3.37*
 201–3004.612.53 to 8.39*3.522.1 to 5.9*
 >30020.367.51 to 55.17*12.843.6 to 45.75*
Months on treatment
 49–72RefRef
 73–961.580.93 to 2.671.671.08 to 2.57*
 ≥973.342.17 to 5.15*2.781.89 to 4.09*
Pre-HAART CD8 ≤800/μL0.9980.998 to 0.999*
Constant0.483.30

An optimal immunological outcome was defined as achieved CD4 count ≥500/μL and a CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8, and conventional outcome was defined as only achieved CD4 count ≥500/μL by study end point.

*p<0.05.

aOR, adjusted OR; HAART, highly active antiretroviral therapy.

Multivariable logistic regression for evaluating variables associated with an optimal immunological outcome and conventional outcome An optimal immunological outcome was defined as achieved CD4 count ≥500/μL and a CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8, and conventional outcome was defined as only achieved CD4 count ≥500/μL by study end point. *p<0.05. aOR, adjusted OR; HAART, highly active antiretroviral therapy.

Discussion

Pre-HAART CD4 count has long been shown to be a predictor of immunological outcome 3–5 years following antiretroviral therapy.1 Our previous longitudinal studies in a cohort of Chinese patients with HIV have demonstrated positive associations between nidus and maximum CD4 count over 5 years irrespective of the causative virus subtype or the regimens prescribed.19 20 In assessing antiretroviral treatment response, however, CD4 count alone appeared to add little to viral load monitoring.21 To account for the potential risk of non-AIDS-related comorbidities including metabolic complications,9 parallel CD4:CD8 ratio testing is gaining popularity as it reflects also the intensity of chronic inflammation implicated.9 10 In this study, a CD4 count ≥500/μL in conjunction with a ratio of ≥0.8 was examined as a target outcome indicator for chronically infected patients on continued antiretroviral therapy. This target was achieved in 15% (105 out of 715) of our patients at the end of a 4-year treatment period. The association of pre-HAART CD8 with optimal immune outcome was stronger with a cut-off ratio of ≥1 but the proportion of patients achieving the target outcome would be very low at 6% (46 out of 718). Both pre-HAART CD4 and CD8 counts, as well as the treatment interval, were independent predictors of this new outcome target. While CD4 remained a useful prognostic marker, using it as the sole marker might overestimate treatment performance by including patients with high CD4 count but high CD8 count and low CD4:CD8 ratio as achiever (205 out of 715 achieved CD4 target only). In this study, we have shown that 44% of patients on HAART achieved a CD4 count ≥500/μL at the end of 4 years, an outcome slightly poorer than that of 59% reported by the Swiss HIV Cohort Study, a discrepancy which could be attributed to our shorter observation period (4 instead of 5 years) and the lower median pre-HAART CD4 count (158/μL compared with 180/μL).22 As concluded in the recently published ‘START’ study examining the benefits of the initiation of antiretroviral therapy in HIV-positive adults with a CD4 count >500/μL, CD4 count per se could not capture all outcome effects arising from immediate HAART in chronic HIV infection.23 Our study confirmed that CD4:CD8 ratio could be a readily available supplementary marker to monitor immune recovery. Evidently, the ratio may vary with lengths of observations, demographics and/or even HAART regimens.17 24 25 As the CD4:CD8 ratio tended to rise more slowly than CD4 recovery, we have chosen an interim ratio of 0.817 to assess the state of immune recovery at 4 years after HAART initiation. Normalisation to a ratio of 1 could in fact be demonstrated in 13% of patients within 7 years, the median observation interval of our cohort. Pre-HAART CD8 count and its normalisation following antiretroviral treatment are relatively underinvestigated.26 27 In our study, pre-HAART CD4 and pre-HAART CD8 counts were positively correlated. It was noted that heterosexuals gave a lower pre-HAART CD8 (table 3) compared with MSM but the difference became insignificant after the adjustment of pre-HAART CD4. Over time, CD4 rise went in parallel with slowly falling CD8 until reaching an optimal CD4 level of ≥500/μL with a near-normalised CD4:CD8 ratio ≥0.8 at year 4. Pre-HAART CD8 was a significant predictor of optimal immune outcome but not conventional outcome. The median CD8 count of former group was lower than latter group of patients in all time points since HAART initiation. Significant expansion of CD8 is known to occur soon after infection and the phenomenon might persist throughout the course of HIV infection. Recent studies suggested that CD8 normalisation was associated with early initiation of HAART during acute infection.18 HIV-specific CD8 has been proposed to play an important role in effecting functional cure of HIV infection.28 Its relationship with the absolute count of CD8 before and after HAART has not been established. With the growing evidence of the role of CD4:CD8 ratio as a new biomarker for non-AIDS morbidity and chronic inflammation,9 10 29 30 it is possible that HIV-positive patients’ clinical outcome could be better explained from both the ratio and CD4 count rather than from the latter alone. From a virological perspective, the estimated cumulative viral load can be viewed as a surrogate of prolonged non-suppression of virus load. It does not however independently predict CD4 or CD4:CD8 ratio outcomes. Apparently, its immunological impacts could be overtaken by a long interval of HAART, if the pre-HAART CD4 and CD8 status were optimal. Overall, our results lent support to early initiation of HAART in chronic HIV infection to avoid temporal accumulation of virus, a conclusion similar to that for primary HIV infection.5 We acknowledge that our study carries a number of limitations. Foremost, all patients had been on HAART during the time when a CD4-guided approach to treatment initiation was enforced. As the patients had been started on either a PI-based or NNRTI-based regimen, the possible impacts of newer generations of antiretroviral like INSTI could not be ascertained. The results should therefore be interpreted with caution, especially that strong association between INSTI-based regimen and CD4/CD8 normalisation has recently been reported.31 These was selection bias which might have limited the extrapolation of results to the entire HIV population. In addition, our dataset did not include other inflammatory or infectious outcomes (eg, HCV and/or cytomegalovirus coinfections32–35) and therefore these could not be analysed in perspective. As the main comparative period was 4 years, the minimum treatment duration of study population, the immunological recovery achieved by patients in this study may not necessarily be reflecting the ultimate response to HAART. We have nevertheless evaluated the outcome (comprising both CD4 count and CD4:CD8 ratio) of all enrolled patients with a median duration of treatment of over 6 years in the final analysis. Theoretically, cohorts with patients observed throughout their lifetime would be invaluable to determine the health benefits of HAART. Analyses from such lifelong cohorts should become a reality in the coming years or decades.

Conclusions

Conventionally, CD4 count has been commonly used as the main outcome marker following HAART. In light of the increasing incidence of comorbidities associated with HIV-related chronic inflammations, CD4 count per se appears to carry little prognostic value in predicting HAART-associated immune recovery. Our results suggested that a combination of CD4 count and CD4:CD8 ratio offers another potentially useful approach to assessing immune outcome, compared with the use of CD4 alone. In evaluating immune recovery following long-term HIV viral suppression, pre-HAART CD8 count could be as important as nidus CD4 count as the independent predictors of the ultimate immune outcome. As both CD4 and CD8 are often routinely collected in the course of HIV management, an assessment of the temporal trends of CD4, CD8 and CD4:CD8 ratio could conveniently predict the immunological outcome without the need for sophisticated immune markers. Virological impact, as inferred from the estimated cumulative viral load after infection, does not however add to the outcome reflected from viral load suppression. The monitoring of the host immunological responses remains the most important approach in assessing treatment outcome following HAART.
  34 in total

Review 1.  The absence of CD4+ T cell count recovery despite receipt of virologically suppressive highly active antiretroviral therapy: clinical risk, immunological gaps, and therapeutic options.

Authors:  Lidia Gazzola; Camilla Tincati; Giusi Maria Bellistrì; Antonella d'Arminio Monforte; Giulia Marchetti
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2009-02-01       Impact factor: 9.079

2.  Characteristics, determinants, and clinical relevance of CD4 T cell recovery to <500 cells/microL in HIV type 1-infected individuals receiving potent antiretroviral therapy.

Authors:  Gilbert R Kaufmann; Hansjakob Furrer; Bruno Ledergerber; Luc Perrin; Milos Opravil; Pietro Vernazza; Matthias Cavassini; Enos Bernasconi; Martin Rickenbach; Bernard Hirschel; Manuel Battegay
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2005-06-24       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  CD4/CD8 ratio normalisation and non-AIDS-related events in individuals with HIV who achieve viral load suppression with antiretroviral therapy: an observational cohort study.

Authors:  Cristina Mussini; Patrizia Lorenzini; Alessandro Cozzi-Lepri; Giuseppe Lapadula; Giulia Marchetti; Emanuele Nicastri; Antonella Cingolani; Miriam Lichtner; Andrea Antinori; Andrea Gori; Antonella d'Arminio Monforte
Journal:  Lancet HIV       Date:  2015-02-06       Impact factor: 12.767

4.  CD4 and CD4/CD8 ratio progression in HIV-HCV infected patients after achievement of SVR.

Authors:  A Saracino; G Bruno; L Scudeller; N Ladisa; N de Gennaro; M Allegrini; L Monno; G Angarano
Journal:  J Clin Virol       Date:  2016-06-18       Impact factor: 3.168

Review 5.  The future role of CD4 cell count for monitoring antiretroviral therapy.

Authors:  Nathan Ford; Graeme Meintjes; Anton Pozniak; Helen Bygrave; Andrew Hill; Trevor Peter; Mary-Ann Davies; Beatriz Grinsztejn; Alexandra Calmy; N Kumarasamy; Praphan Phanuphak; Pierre deBeaudrap; Marco Vitoria; Meg Doherty; Wendy Stevens; George K Siberry
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 25.071

Review 6.  Incomplete immune recovery in HIV infection: mechanisms, relevance for clinical care, and possible solutions.

Authors:  Julie C Gaardbo; Hans J Hartling; Jan Gerstoft; Susanne D Nielsen
Journal:  Clin Dev Immunol       Date:  2012-03-14

7.  Antiretroviral Regimens and CD4/CD8 Ratio Normalization in HIV-Infected Patients during the Initial Year of Treatment: A Cohort Study.

Authors:  F De Salvador-Guillouët; C Sakarovitch; J Durant; K Risso; E Demonchy; P M Roger; E Fontas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  CD4/CD8 ratio is not predictive of multi-morbidity prevalence in HIV-infected patients but identify patients with higher CVD risk.

Authors:  Marianna Menozzi; Stefano Zona; Antonella Santoro; Federica Carli; Chiara Stentarelli; Cristina Mussini; Giovanni Guaraldi
Journal:  J Int AIDS Soc       Date:  2014-11-02       Impact factor: 5.396

9.  CD8+ T-cells count in acute myocardial infarction in HIV disease in a predominantly male cohort.

Authors:  Oluwatosin A Badejo; Chung-Chou Chang; Kaku A So-Armah; Russell P Tracy; Jason V Baker; David Rimland; Adeel A Butt; Adam J Gordon; Charles R Rinaldo; Kevin Kraemer; Jeffrey H Samet; Hilary A Tindle; Matthew B Goetz; Maria C Rodriguez-Barradas; Roger Bedimo; Cynthia L Gibert; David A Leaf; Lewis H Kuller; Steven G Deeks; Amy C Justice; Matthew S Freiberg
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-01-19       Impact factor: 3.411

10.  Increased risk of serious non-AIDS-related events in HIV-infected subjects on antiretroviral therapy associated with a low CD4/CD8 ratio.

Authors:  Sergio Serrano-Villar; María Jesús Pérez-Elías; Fernando Dronda; José Luis Casado; Ana Moreno; Ana Royuela; José Antonio Pérez-Molina; Talia Sainz; Enrique Navas; José Manuel Hermida; Carmen Quereda; Santiago Moreno
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  9 in total

1.  Acute HIV Infection and CD4/CD8 Ratio Normalization After Antiretroviral Therapy Initiation.

Authors:  Thibaut Davy-Mendez; Sonia Napravnik; Oksana Zakharova; JoAnn Kuruc; Cynthia Gay; Charles B Hicks; Kara S Mcgee; Joseph J Eron
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 3.731

2.  CD4+:CD8+ T Cell Ratio Normalization and the Development of AIDS Events in People with HIV Starting Antiretroviral Therapy.

Authors:  Hajra Okhai; María Jesús Vivancos-Gallego; Teresa Hill; Caroline A Sabin
Journal:  AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses       Date:  2020-08-11       Impact factor: 2.205

3.  Immune restoration in HIV-1-infected patients after 12 years of antiretroviral therapy: a real-world observational study.

Authors:  Jiaye Liu; Lifeng Wang; Yuying Hou; Yan Zhao; Zhihui Dou; Ye Ma; Dawei Zhang; Yasong Wu; Decai Zhao; Zhongfu Liu; Fujie Zhang; Lei Jin; Ji-Yuan Zhang; Ruonan Xu; Ming Shi; Lei Huang; Zunyou Wu; Mengjie Han; George F Gao; Fu-Sheng Wang
Journal:  Emerg Microbes Infect       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 7.163

4.  Association Between CD4/CD8 Ratio Recovery and Chronic Kidney Disease Among Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Patients Receiving Antiretroviral Therapy: A 17-Year Observational Cohort Study.

Authors:  Fengxiang Qin; Qing Lv; Wen Hong; Di Wei; Kui Huang; Ke Lan; Rongfeng Chen; Jie Liu; Bingyu Liang; Huayue Liang; Hao Liang; Shanfang Qin; Li Ye; Junjun Jiang
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2022-02-10       Impact factor: 5.640

5.  Factors Influencing Immune Restoration in People Living with HIV/AIDS.

Authors:  Bogusz Jan Aksak-Wąs; Anna Urbańska; Kaja Scheibe; Karol Serwin; Magdalena Leszczyszyn-Pynka; Milena Rafalska-Kosior; Joanna Gołąb; Daniel Chober; Miłosz Parczewski
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 4.241

6.  A Real-world Evidence-based Management of HIV by Differential Duration HAART Treatment and its Association with Incidence of Oral Lesions.

Authors:  Wen Shu; Fei Du; Jin-Song Bai; Ling-Yun Yin; Kai-Wen Duan; Cheng-Wen Li
Journal:  Curr HIV Res       Date:  2022       Impact factor: 1.341

7.  Analysis of the Influencing Factors of Immunological Nonresponders in Wuhan, China.

Authors:  Enze Lei; Shuna Jin; Wei Ni; Manlin Feng; Yanhe Luo; Lianguo Ruan; Mingzhong Xiao; Jianzhong Liu
Journal:  Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 2.585

8.  HIV Reservoir Decay and CD4 Recovery Associated With High CD8 Counts in Immune Restored Patients on Long-Term ART.

Authors:  Lu-Xue Zhang; Yan-Mei Jiao; Chao Zhang; Jin-Wen Song; Xing Fan; Ruo-Nan Xu; Hui-Huang Huang; Ji-Yuan Zhang; Li-Feng Wang; Chun-Bao Zhou; Lei Jin; Ming Shi; Fu-Sheng Wang
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2020-07-23       Impact factor: 7.561

Review 9.  Incomplete immune reconstitution in HIV/AIDS patients on antiretroviral therapy: Challenges of immunological non-responders.

Authors:  Xiaodong Yang; Bin Su; Xin Zhang; Yan Liu; Hao Wu; Tong Zhang
Journal:  J Leukoc Biol       Date:  2020-01-22       Impact factor: 4.962

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.