We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
Beyond the NIH Multicenter HIV Transplant Trial Experience: Outcomes of HIV+ Liver Transplant Recipients Compared to HCV+ or HIV+/HCV+ Coinfected Recipients in the United States.
Clinical Infectious Diseases 2015 October 2
BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of liver transplant (LT) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfected recipients in the United States is unknown. We investigated (i) the effect of HIV on US patient and allograft LT outcomes, compared to HCV+ and HIV/HCV uninfected recipients and (ii) whether LT at centers that participated in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Solid Organ Transplantation in HIV Trial, reflecting experience and a standardized approach to patient selection, impacted outcomes.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of primary LT recipients transplanted 27 February 2002 through 31 December 2013, categorized by serostatus: HCV+ (n = 20 829), HIV+ (n = 72), HIV+/HCV+ (n = 160), and HIV-/HCV- uninfected (n = 22 926) as reference. Survival was determined using Cox regression, stratified according to center NIH trial participation.
RESULTS: HCV (hazard ratio [HR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41-1.52) and HIV/HCV coinfection (HR 2.62, 95% CI, 2.06-3.33) were associated with mortality; HIV monoinfection was not (HR 1.37, 95% CI, .86-2.18). This was unchanged after stratification on NIH trial participation, although mortality was higher in NIH-enrolling (HIV+: HR 1.65, 95% CI, .93-2.92; HIV+/HCV+: HR 3.15, 95% CI, 2.32-4.28) than in non-enrolling centers (HIV+: HR 1.03, 95% CI, .43-2.47, HIV+/HCV+: HR 2.55, 95% CI, 1.64-3.96). Although allograft loss was higher in HIV/HCV coinfected recipients transplanted at enrolling (HR 2.64, 9%% CI, 1.91-3.64) vs nonenrolling centers (HR 2.22, 95% CI, 1.41-3.49), there was no difference in HIV and HCV monoinfected patients.
CONCLUSIONS: HIV+ LT recipient outcomes were superior to HCV+ or HIV/HCV coinfected recipients. Despite a standardized approach and plausibly more experience with HIV patients, transplantation at NIH study center did not improve outcomes.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of primary LT recipients transplanted 27 February 2002 through 31 December 2013, categorized by serostatus: HCV+ (n = 20 829), HIV+ (n = 72), HIV+/HCV+ (n = 160), and HIV-/HCV- uninfected (n = 22 926) as reference. Survival was determined using Cox regression, stratified according to center NIH trial participation.
RESULTS: HCV (hazard ratio [HR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41-1.52) and HIV/HCV coinfection (HR 2.62, 95% CI, 2.06-3.33) were associated with mortality; HIV monoinfection was not (HR 1.37, 95% CI, .86-2.18). This was unchanged after stratification on NIH trial participation, although mortality was higher in NIH-enrolling (HIV+: HR 1.65, 95% CI, .93-2.92; HIV+/HCV+: HR 3.15, 95% CI, 2.32-4.28) than in non-enrolling centers (HIV+: HR 1.03, 95% CI, .43-2.47, HIV+/HCV+: HR 2.55, 95% CI, 1.64-3.96). Although allograft loss was higher in HIV/HCV coinfected recipients transplanted at enrolling (HR 2.64, 9%% CI, 1.91-3.64) vs nonenrolling centers (HR 2.22, 95% CI, 1.41-3.49), there was no difference in HIV and HCV monoinfected patients.
CONCLUSIONS: HIV+ LT recipient outcomes were superior to HCV+ or HIV/HCV coinfected recipients. Despite a standardized approach and plausibly more experience with HIV patients, transplantation at NIH study center did not improve outcomes.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app