↓ Skip to main content

Are Long-Term Non-Progressors Very Slow Progressors? Insights from the Chelsea and Westminster HIV Cohort, 1988–2010

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
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.
Title
Are Long-Term Non-Progressors Very Slow Progressors? Insights from the Chelsea and Westminster HIV Cohort, 1988–2010
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0029844
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sundhiya Mandalia, Samantha J. Westrop, Eduard J. Beck, Mark Nelson, Brian G. Gazzard, Nesrina Imami

Abstract

Define and identify long-term non-progressors (LTNP) and HIV controllers (HIC), and estimate time until disease progression. LTNP are HIV-1(+) patients who maintain stable CD4(+) T-cell counts, with no history of opportunistic infection or antiretroviral therapy (ART). HIC are a subset of LTNP who additionally have undetectable viraemia. These individuals may provide insights for prophylactic and therapeutic development. Records of HIV-1(+) individuals attending Chelsea and Westminster Hospital (1988-2010), were analysed. LTNP were defined as: HIV-1(+) for >7 years; ART-naïve; no history of opportunistic infection and normal, stable CD4(+) T-cell counts. MIXED procedure in SAS using random intercept model identified long-term stable CD4(+) T-cell counts. Survival analysis estimated time since diagnosis until disease progression. Subjects exhibiting long-term stable CD4(+) T-cell counts with history below the normal range (<450 cells/µl blood) were compared to LTNP whose CD4(+) T-cell count always remained normal. Within these two groups subjects with HIV-1 RNA load below limit of detection (BLD) were identified. Of 14,227 patients, 1,204 were diagnosed HIV-1(+) over 7 years ago and were ART-naïve. Estimated time until disease progression for the 20% (239) whose CD4(+) T-cell counts remained within the normal range, was 6.2 years (IQR: 2.0 to 9.6); significantly longer than 4.0 years (IQR: 1.0 to 7.3) for patients with historical CD4(+) T-cell count below normal (Logrank chi-squared = 21.26; p<0.001). Within a subpopulation of 312 asymptomatic patients, 50 exhibited long-term stable CD4(+) T-cell counts. Of these, 13 were LTNP, one of whom met HIC criteria. Of the remaining 37 patients with long-term stable low CD4(+) T-cell counts, 3 controlled HIV-1 RNA load BLD. Individuals with stable, normal CD4(+) T-cell counts progressed less rapidly than those with low CD4(+) T-cell counts. Few LTNP and HIC identified in this and other studies, endorse the need for universal definitions to facilitate comparison.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 19%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Master 6 13%
Other 4 9%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 7 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 7 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 March 2023.
All research outputs
#15,135,864
of 24,040,389 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#128,077
of 206,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,270
of 159,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,875
of 3,535 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,040,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 206,325 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 159,459 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,535 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.