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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Switching to dual/monotherapy determines an increase in CD8+ in HIV-infected individuals: an observational cohort study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12916-018-1046-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cristina Mussini, Patrizia Lorenzini, Alessandro Cozzi-Lepri, Giulia Marchetti, Stefano Rusconi, Andrea Gori, Silvia Nozza, Miriam Lichtner, Andrea Antinori, Andrea Cossarizza, Antonella d’Arminio Monforte, for the Icona Foundation Study Group |
| Abstract |
The CD4/CD8 ratio has been associated with the risk of AIDS and non-AIDS events. We describe trends in immunological parameters in people who underwent a switch to monotherapy or dual therapy, compared to a control group remaining on triple antiretroviral therapy (ART). We included patients in Icona who started a three-drug combination ART regimen from an ART-naïve status and achieved a viral load ≤ 50 copies/mL; they were subsequently switched to another triple or to a mono or double regimen. Standard linear regression at fixed points in time (12-24 months after the switch) and linear mixed model analysis with random intercepts and slopes were used to compare CD4 and CD8 counts and their ratio over time according to regimen types (triple vs. dual and vs. mono). A total of 1241 patients were included; 1073 switched to triple regimens, 104 to dual (72 with 1 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI), 32 NRTI-sparing), and 64 to monotherapy. At 12 months after the switch, for the multivariable linear regression the mean change in the log10 CD4/CD8 ratio for patients on dual therapy was -0.03 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.05, -0.0002), and the mean change in CD8 count was +99 (95% CI +12.1, +186.3), taking those on triple therapy as reference. In contrast, there was no evidence for a difference in CD4 count change. When using all counts, there was evidence for a significant difference in the slope of the ratio and CD8 count between people who were switched to triple (points/year change ratio = +0.056, CD8 = -25.7) and those to dual regimen (ratio = -0.029, CD8 = +110.4). We found an increase in CD8 lymphocytes in people who were switched to dual regimens compared to those who were switched to triple. Patients on monotherapy did not show significant differences. The long-term implications of this difference should be ascertained. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 87 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 21% |
| Professor | 9 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 20% |
| Unknown | 24 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 34% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 7 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 33 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 23 May 2023.
All research outputs
#7,053,802
of 23,079,238 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,540
of 3,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,827
of 331,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#43
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,079,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,465 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.7. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 331,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.