| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Shepherd, L., et al.
(author)
-
Infection-related and -unrelated malignancies, HIV and the aging population
- 2016
-
In: HIV Medicine. - : Wiley. - 1464-2662 .- 1468-1293. ; 17:8, s. 590-600
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: HIV-positive people have increased risk of infection-related malignancies (IRMs) and infection-unrelated malignancies (IURMs). The aim of the study was to determine the impact of aging on future IRM and IURM incidence. Methods: People enrolled in EuroSIDA and followed from the latest of the first visit or 1 January 2001 until the last visit or death were included in the study. Poisson regression was used to investigate the impact of aging on the incidence of IRMs and IURMs, adjusting for demographic, clinical and laboratory confounders. Linear exponential smoothing models forecasted future incidence. Results: A total of 15 648 people contributed 95 033 person-years of follow-up, of whom 610 developed 643 malignancies [IRMs: 388 (60%); IURMs: 255 (40%)]. After adjustment, a higher IRM incidence was associated with a lower CD4 count [adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) CD4 count < 200 cells/μL: 3.77; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.59, 5.51; compared with ≥ 500 cells/μL], independent of age, while a CD4 count < 200 cells/μL was associated with IURMs in people aged < 50 years only (aIRR: 2.51; 95% CI 1.40–4.54). Smoking was associated with IURMs (aIRR: 1.75; 95% CI 1.23, 2.49) compared with never smokers in people aged ≥ 50 years only, and not with IRMs. The incidences of both IURMs and IRMs increased with older age. It was projected that the incidence of IRMs would decrease by 29% over a 5-year period from 3.1 (95% CI 1.5–5.9) per 1000 person-years in 2011, whereas the IURM incidence would increase by 44% from 4.1 (95% CI 2.2–7.2) per 1000 person-years over the same period. Conclusions: Demographic and HIV-related risk factors for IURMs (aging and smoking) and IRMs (immunodeficiency and ongoing viral replication) differ markedly and the contribution from IURMs relative to IRMs will continue to increase as a result of aging of the HIV-infected population, high smoking and lung cancer prevalence and a low prevalence of untreated HIV infection. These findings suggest the need for targeted preventive measures and evaluation of the cost−benefit of screening for IURMs in HIV-infected populations.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Axfors, Cathrine, et al.
(author)
-
Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19 : a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
- 2021
-
In: BMC Infectious Diseases. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1471-2334. ; 21:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, ). Methods: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I-2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
