Back

A Retroactive Study on Factors Influencing the Efficacy of Treatment for Tuberculosis Patients with HIV: based on the data from 2010 to 2020 in Shanghai, China

Dong, C.; Zhang, R.; Li, S.; Chen, J.; Liu, Y.; Xia, X.; Liu, G.; Shen, Y.; Liu, L.; Zeng, L.

2023-12-29 hiv aids
10.1101/2023.12.27.23300538 medRxiv
Show abstract

At present, the factors influencing Tuberculosis (TB) treatment effectiveness in HIV/TB co-infected patients need to be supported by more substantial real-world evidence. A retrospective study is conducted to fill the vacancy. 461 TB patients with HIV are defined as 742 samples according to each TB detection period. 7788 valid treatment records corresponding to 17 drug compositions for TB and 150 clinical indicators with more than 100 records are used to conduct data mining with consensus clustering, Fishers exact test, stratified analysis, and three modeling approaches, including logistic regression, support vector machine, and random forest. We find that A CD4+ T cell count of 42 cells per L may serve as a sensitive classification standard for the immune level to assist in evaluating or predicting the efficacy of TB (P=0.007); Rifabutin and levofloxacin alone or in combination may be more effective than other first- and second-line anti-TB agents in combination (P=0.037); Samples with low immune levels (CD4[less double equals]42) may be more resistant to first-line TB drugs (P=0.049); Age (P=0.015), bicarbonate radical (P=0.007), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P=0.026), pre-treatment CD8+ T cell count (P=0.015, age<60, male), neutrophil percentage (P=0.033, age<60), rifabutin (P=0.010, age<60), and cycloserine (P=0.027, age<60) may influence the TB treatment effectiveness; More evidence is needed to support the relationship between pre-treatment clinical indicators or drug regimens and TB treatment effectiveness (The best AUC is 0.560[~]0.763); The percentage of lymphocytes (P=0.028) can be used as an effective TB therapeutic target. These perspectives supplement knowledge in relevant clinical aspects.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.0%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 13%
14.6%
3
Infectious Diseases of Poverty
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.3%
4
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.5%
50% of probability mass above
5
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.9%
6
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
218 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.7%
7
Transboundary and Emerging Diseases
34 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
8
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
9
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
10
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
11
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.7%
12
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
13
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
14
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
15
BioMed Research International
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
16
Journal of Medical Virology
137 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
17
Cells
232 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
18
Infection, Genetics and Evolution
43 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
19
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
20
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.0%
21
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
22
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
23
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 24%
0.8%
25
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 74%
0.8%
26
The Innovation
12 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
27
Journal of Clinical Virology
62 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
28
Journal of Virological Methods
36 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
29
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
30
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%