↓ Skip to main content

Differences in response to antiretroviral therapy in HIV-positive patients being treated for tuberculosis in Eastern Europe, Western Europe and Latin America

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Differences in response to antiretroviral therapy in HIV-positive patients being treated for tuberculosis in Eastern Europe, Western Europe and Latin America
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12879-018-3077-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yanink Caro-Vega, Anna Schultze, Anne Marie W. Efsen, Frank A. Post, Alexander Panteleev, Aliaksandr Skrahin, Jose M. Miro, Enrico Girardi, Daria N. Podlekareva, Jens D. Lundgren, Juan Sierra-Madero, Javier Toibaro, Jaime Andrade-Villanueva, Simona Tetradov, Jan Fehr, Joan Caylà, Marcelo H. Losso, Robert F. Miller, Amanda Mocroft, Ole Kirk, Brenda Crabtree-Ramírez

Abstract

Efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens are preferred for treatment of adult HIV-positive patients co-infected with tuberculosis (HIV/TB). Few studies have compared outcomes among HIV/TB patients treated with efavirenz or non-efavirenz containing regimens. HIV-positive patients aged ≥16 years with a diagnosis of tuberculosis recruited to the TB:HIV study between Jan 1, 2011, and Dec 31, 2013 in 19 countries in Eastern Europe (EE), Western Europe (WE), and Latin America (LA) who received ART concomitantly with TB treatment were included. Patients either received efavirenz-containing ART starting between 15 days prior to, during, or within 90 days after starting tuberculosis treatment, (efavirenz group), or other ART regimens (non-efavirenz group). Patients who started ART more than 90 days after initiation of TB treatment, or who experienced ART interruption of more than 15 days during TB treatment were excluded. We describe rates and factors associated with death, virological suppression, and loss to follow up at 12 months using univariate, multivariate Cox, and marginal structural models to compare the two groups of patients. Of 965 patients (647 receiving efavirenz-containing ART, and 318 a non-efavirenz regimen) 50% were from EE, 28% from WE, and 22% from LA. Among those not receiving efavirenz-containing ART, regimens mainly contained a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (57%), or raltegravir (22%). At 12 months 1.4% of patients in WE had died, compared to 20% in EE: rates of virological suppression ranged from 21% in EE to 61% in WE. After adjusting for potential confounders, rates of death (adjusted Hazard Ratio; aHR, 95%CI: 1.13, 0.72-1.78), virological suppression (aHR, 95%CI: 0.97, 0.76-1.22), and loss to follow up (aHR, 95%CI: 1.17, 0.81-1.67), were similar in patients treated with efavirenz and non-efavirenz containing ART regimens. In this large, prospective cohort, the response to ART varied significantly across geographical regions, whereas the ART regimen (efavirenz or non-efavirenz containing) did not impact on the proportion of patients who were virologically-suppressed, lost to follow up or dead at 12 months.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 20%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 18 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 21 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 June 2019.
All research outputs
#14,273,152
of 23,317,888 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#3,663
of 7,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,789
of 327,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#52
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,317,888 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,320 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.