Displaying all 7 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Sansom K, Reynolds A, Windred D, Phillips A, Dhaliwal SS, Walsh J, et al.
    Sleep, 2024 Jan 05.
    PMID: 38180870 DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsae001
    STUDY OBJECTIVES: Little is known about the inter-relationships between sleep regularity, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and important health markers. This study examined whether irregular sleep is associated with OSA and hypertension, and if this modifies the known association between OSA and hypertension.

    METHODS: 602 adults (age mean(SD) =56.96(5.51) years, female=60%) from the Raine Study who were not evening or night shift workers were assessed for OSA (in-laboratory polysomnography; apnea hypopnea index (AHI) ≥15events/hour), hypertension (doctor diagnosed; or systolic blood pressure ≥140mmHg and/or diastolic ≥90mmHg) and sleep (wrist actigraphy for ≥5 days). A sleep regularity index (SRI) was determined from actigraphy. Participants were categorised by tertiles as severely irregular, mildly irregular, or regular sleepers. Logistic regression models examined the interrelationships between SRI, OSA and hypertension. Covariates included age, sex, body mass index, actigraphy sleep duration, insomnia, depression, activity, alcohol, smoking, and anti-hypertensive medication.

    RESULTS: Compared to regular sleepers, participants with mildly irregular (OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.20-3.27) and severely irregular (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.25-3.42) sleep had greater odds of OSA. Compared to those with no OSA and regular sleep, OSA and severely irregular sleep combined had the highest odds of hypertension (OR 2.34 95% CI 1.07-5.12; p for interaction=0.02) while those with OSA and regular/mildly irregular sleep were not at increased risk (p for interaction=0.20).

    CONCLUSIONS: Sleep irregularity may be an important modifiable target for hypertension among those with OSA.

  2. HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration, Cain LE, Phillips A, Olson A, Sabin C, Jose S, et al.
    Clin Infect Dis, 2015 Apr 15;60(8):1262-8.
    PMID: 25567330 DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciu1167
    BACKGROUND: Current clinical guidelines consider regimens consisting of either ritonavir-boosted atazanavir or ritonavir-boosted lopinavir and a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone among their recommended and alternative first-line antiretroviral regimens. However, these guidelines are based on limited evidence from randomized clinical trials and clinical experience.

    METHODS: We compared these regimens with respect to clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes using data from prospective studies of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals in Europe and the United States in the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration, 2004-2013. Antiretroviral therapy-naive and AIDS-free individuals were followed from the time they started a lopinavir or an atazanavir regimen. We estimated the 'intention-to-treat' effect for atazanavir vs lopinavir regimens on each of the outcomes.

    RESULTS: A total of 6668 individuals started a lopinavir regimen (213 deaths, 457 AIDS-defining illnesses or deaths), and 4301 individuals started an atazanavir regimen (83 deaths, 157 AIDS-defining illnesses or deaths). The adjusted intention-to-treat hazard ratios for atazanavir vs lopinavir regimens were 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI], .53-.91) for death, 0.67 (95% CI, .55-.82) for AIDS-defining illness or death, and 0.91 (95% CI, .84-.99) for virologic failure at 12 months. The mean 12-month increase in CD4 count was 8.15 (95% CI, -.13 to 16.43) cells/µL higher in the atazanavir group. Estimates differed by NRTI backbone.

    CONCLUSIONS: Our estimates are consistent with a lower mortality, a lower incidence of AIDS-defining illness, a greater 12-month increase in CD4 cell count, and a smaller risk of virologic failure at 12 months for atazanavir compared with lopinavir regimens.

  3. del Amo J, Moreno S, Bucher HC, Furrer H, Logan R, Sterne J, et al.
    Clin Infect Dis, 2012 May;54(9):1364-72.
    PMID: 22460971 DOI: 10.1093/cid/cis203
    BACKGROUND: The lower tuberculosis incidence reported in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive individuals receiving combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) is difficult to interpret causally. Furthermore, the role of unmasking immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) is unclear. We aim to estimate the effect of cART on tuberculosis incidence in HIV-positive individuals in high-income countries.

    METHODS: The HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration consisted of 12 cohorts from the United States and Europe of HIV-positive, ART-naive, AIDS-free individuals aged ≥18 years with baseline CD4 cell count and HIV RNA levels followed up from 1996 through 2007. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for cART versus no cART, adjusted for time-varying CD4 cell count and HIV RNA level via inverse probability weighting.

    RESULTS: Of 65 121 individuals, 712 developed tuberculosis over 28 months of median follow-up (incidence, 3.0 cases per 1000 person-years). The HR for tuberculosis for cART versus no cART was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.72) overall, 1.04 (95% CI, 0.64-1.68) for individuals aged >50 years, and 1.46 (95% CI, 0.70-3.04) for people with a CD4 cell count of <50 cells/μL. Compared with people who had not started cART, HRs differed by time since cART initiation: 1.36 (95% CI, 0.98-1.89) for initiation <3 months ago and 0.44 (95% CI, 0.34-0.58) for initiation ≥3 months ago. Compared with people who had not initiated cART, HRs <3 months after cART initiation were 0.67 (95% CI, 0.38-1.18), 1.51 (95% CI, 0.98-2.31), and 3.20 (95% CI, 1.34-7.60) for people <35, 35-50, and >50 years old, respectively, and 2.30 (95% CI, 1.03-5.14) for people with a CD4 cell count of <50 cells/μL.

    CONCLUSIONS: Tuberculosis incidence decreased after cART initiation but not among people >50 years old or with CD4 cell counts of <50 cells/μL. Despite an overall decrease in tuberculosis incidence, the increased rate during 3 months of ART suggests unmasking IRIS.

  4. Cain LE, Phillips A, Lodi S, Sabin C, Bansi L, Justice A, et al.
    AIDS, 2012 Aug 24;26(13):1691-705.
    PMID: 22546987
    OBJECTIVE: To compare regimens consisting of either efavirenz or nevirapine and two or more nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) among HIV-infected, antiretroviral-naive, and AIDS-free individuals with respect to clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes.

    DESIGN: Prospective studies of HIV-infected individuals in Europe and the US included in the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration.

    METHODS: Antiretroviral therapy-naive and AIDS-free individuals were followed from the time they started an NRTI, efavirenz or nevirapine, classified as following one or both types of regimens at baseline, and censored when they started an ineligible drug or at 6 months if their regimen was not yet complete. We estimated the 'intention-to-treat' effect for nevirapine versus efavirenz regimens on clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes. Our models included baseline covariates and adjusted for potential bias introduced by censoring via inverse probability weighting.

    RESULTS: A total of 15 336 individuals initiated an efavirenz regimen (274 deaths, 774 AIDS-defining illnesses) and 8129 individuals initiated a nevirapine regimen (203 deaths, 441 AIDS-defining illnesses). The intention-to-treat hazard ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] for nevirapine versus efavirenz regimens were 1.59 (1.27, 1.98) for death and 1.28 (1.09, 1.50) for AIDS-defining illness. Individuals on nevirapine regimens experienced a smaller 12-month increase in CD4 cell count by 11.49 cells/μl and were 52% more likely to have virologic failure at 12 months as those on efavirenz regimens.

    CONCLUSIONS: Our intention-to-treat estimates are consistent with a lower mortality, a lower incidence of AIDS-defining illness, a larger 12-month increase in CD4 cell count, and a smaller risk of virologic failure at 12 months for efavirenz compared with nevirapine.

  5. HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration, Ray M, Logan R, Sterne JA, Hernández-Díaz S, Robins JM, et al.
    AIDS, 2010 Jan 02;24(1):123-37.
    PMID: 19770621 DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e3283324283
    OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) on mortality among HIV-infected individuals after appropriate adjustment for time-varying confounding by indication.

    DESIGN: A collaboration of 12 prospective cohort studies from Europe and the United States (the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration) that includes 62 760 HIV-infected, therapy-naive individuals followed for an average of 3.3 years. Inverse probability weighting of marginal structural models was used to adjust for measured confounding by indication.

    RESULTS: Two thousand and thirty-nine individuals died during the follow-up. The mortality hazard ratio was 0.48 (95% confidence interval 0.41-0.57) for cART initiation versus no initiation. In analyses stratified by CD4 cell count at baseline, the corresponding hazard ratios were 0.29 (0.22-0.37) for less than 100 cells/microl, 0.33 (0.25-0.44) for 100 to less than 200 cells/microl, 0.38 (0.28-0.52) for 200 to less than 350 cells/microl, 0.55 (0.41-0.74) for 350 to less than 500 cells/microl, and 0.77 (0.58-1.01) for 500 cells/microl or more. The estimated hazard ratio varied with years since initiation of cART from 0.57 (0.49-0.67) for less than 1 year since initiation to 0.21 (0.14-0.31) for 5 years or more (P value for trend <0.001).

    CONCLUSION: We estimated that cART halved the average mortality rate in HIV-infected individuals. The mortality reduction was greater in those with worse prognosis at the start of follow-up.

  6. Lodi S, Phillips A, Logan R, Olson A, Costagliola D, Abgrall S, et al.
    Lancet HIV, 2015 Aug;2(8):e335-43.
    PMID: 26423376 DOI: 10.1016/S2352-3018(15)00108-3
    BACKGROUND: Recommendations have differed nationally and internationally with respect to the best time to start antiretroviral therapy (ART). We compared effectiveness of three strategies for initiation of ART in high-income countries for HIV-positive individuals who do not have AIDS: immediate initiation, initiation at a CD4 count less than 500 cells per μL, and initiation at a CD4 count less than 350 cells per μL.

    METHODS: We used data from the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration of cohort studies in Europe and the USA. We included 55,826 individuals aged 18 years or older who were diagnosed with HIV-1 infection between January, 2000, and September, 2013, had not started ART, did not have AIDS, and had CD4 count and HIV-RNA viral load measurements within 6 months of HIV diagnosis. We estimated relative risks of death and of death or AIDS-defining illness, mean survival time, the proportion of individuals in need of ART, and the proportion of individuals with HIV-RNA viral load less than 50 copies per mL, as would have been recorded under each ART initiation strategy after 7 years of HIV diagnosis. We used the parametric g-formula to adjust for baseline and time-varying confounders.

    FINDINGS: Median CD4 count at diagnosis of HIV infection was 376 cells per μL (IQR 222-551). Compared with immediate initiation, the estimated relative risk of death was 1·02 (95% CI 1·01-1·02) when ART was started at a CD4 count less than 500 cells per μL, and 1·06 (1·04-1·08) with initiation at a CD4 count less than 350 cells per μL. Corresponding estimates for death or AIDS-defining illness were 1·06 (1·06-1·07) and 1·20 (1·17-1·23), respectively. Compared with immediate initiation, the mean survival time at 7 years with a strategy of initiation at a CD4 count less than 500 cells per μL was 2 days shorter (95% CI 1-2) and at a CD4 count less than 350 cells per μL was 5 days shorter (4-6). 7 years after diagnosis of HIV, 100%, 98·7% (95% CI 98·6-98·7), and 92·6% (92·2-92·9) of individuals would have been in need of ART with immediate initiation, initiation at a CD4 count less than 500 cells per μL, and initiation at a CD4 count less than 350 cells per μL, respectively. Corresponding proportions of individuals with HIV-RNA viral load less than 50 copies per mL at 7 years were 87·3% (87·3-88·6), 87·4% (87·4-88·6), and 83·8% (83·6-84·9).

    INTERPRETATION: The benefits of immediate initiation of ART, such as prolonged survival and AIDS-free survival and increased virological suppression, were small in this high-income setting with relatively low CD4 count at HIV diagnosis. The estimated beneficial effect on AIDS is less than in recently reported randomised trials. Increasing rates of HIV testing might be as important as a policy of early initiation of ART.

    FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.

  7. Gallagher AJ, Brownscombe JW, Alsudairy NA, Casagrande AB, Fu C, Harding L, et al.
    Nat Commun, 2022 Nov 01;13(1):6328.
    PMID: 36319621 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-33926-1
    Seagrass conservation is critical for mitigating climate change due to the large stocks of carbon they sequester in the seafloor. However, effective conservation and its potential to provide nature-based solutions to climate change is hindered by major uncertainties regarding seagrass extent and distribution. Here, we describe the characterization of the world's largest seagrass ecosystem, located in The Bahamas. We integrate existing spatial estimates with an updated empirical remote sensing product and perform extensive ground-truthing of seafloor with 2,542 diver surveys across remote sensing tiles. We also leverage seafloor assessments and movement data obtained from instrument-equipped tiger sharks, which have strong fidelity to seagrass ecosystems, to augment and further validate predictions. We report a consensus area of at least 66,000 km2 and up to 92,000 km2 of seagrass habitat across The Bahamas Banks. Sediment core analysis of stored organic carbon further confirmed the global relevance of the blue carbon stock in this ecosystem. Data from tiger sharks proved important in supporting mapping and ground-truthing remote sensing estimates. This work provides evidence of major knowledge gaps in the ocean ecosystem, the benefits in partnering with marine animals to address these gaps, and underscores support for rapid protection of oceanic carbon sinks.
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links