ArticlePloS one2011
Development and validation of decision rules to guide frequency of monitoring CD4 cell count in HIV-1 infection before starting antiretroviral therapy.
Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- How often should self-monitoring of blood pressure be repeated? A secondary analysis of data from two randomized controlled trials.Journal of hypertension · 2025Trial
- Optimising research investment by simulating and evaluating monitoring strategies to inform a trial: a simulation of liver fibrosis monitoring.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Reply.Medical journal, Armed Forces India · 2014Article
- Rate of decline in CD4 count in HIV patients not on antiretroviral therapy.Medical journal, Armed Forces India · 2014Article
- Should malaria treatment be guided by a point of care rapid test? A threshold approach to malaria management in rural Burkina Faso.PloS one · 2013Article
- Factors affecting timing of antiretroviral treatment initiation based on monitoring CD4 counts.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2012Article
- The basis for monitoring strategies in clinical guidelines: a case study of prostate-specific antigen for monitoring in prostate cancer.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2012Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough CD4 cell count monitoring is used to decide when to start antiretroviral therapy in patients with HIV-1 infection, there are no evidence-based recommendations regarding its optimal frequency. It is common practice to monitor every 3 to 6 months, often coupled with viral load monitoring. We developed rules to guide frequency of CD4 cell count monitoring in HIV infection before starting antiretroviral therapy, which we validated retrospectively in patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsWe built up two prediction rules ("Snap-shot rule" for a single sample and "Track-shot rule" for multiple determinations) based on a systematic review of published longitudinal analyses of CD4 cell count trajectories. We applied the rules in 2608 untreated patients to classify their 18 061 CD4 counts as either justifiable or superfluous, according to their prior ≥5% or <5% chance of meeting predetermined thresholds for starting treatment. The percentage of measurements that both rules falsely deemed superfluous never exceeded 5%. Superfluous CD4 determinations represented 4%, 11%, and 39% of all actual determinations for treatment thresholds of 500, 350, and 200×10(6)/L, respectively. The Track-shot rule was only marginally superior to the Snap-shot rule. Both rules lose usefulness for CD4 counts coming near to treatment threshold. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Frequent CD4 count monitoring of patients with CD4 counts well above the threshold for initiating therapy is unlikely to identify patients who require therapy. It appears sufficient to measure CD4 cell count 1 year after a count >650 for a threshold of 200, >900 for 350, or >1150 for 500×10(6)/L, respectively. When CD4 counts fall below these limits, increased monitoring frequency becomes advisable. These rules offer guidance for efficient CD4 monitoring, particularly in resource-limited settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.