Trial reportBMC public health2014
Optimal starting point for antiretroviral HIV treatment in a town in Cameroon: a randomised controlled study.
Trial report in BMC public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluating HIV drug resistance in the middle East and North Africa and its associated factors: a systematic review.Virology journal · 2025Pooled it
- Early initiation of antiretroviral treatment: Challenges in the Middle East and North Africa.World journal of virology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOptimal starting point for antiretroviral treatment (ART) has been uncertain.
methodsParallel group, single blind, randomised controlled study of adult HIV positive patients consulting at the Protestant Hospital, Ngaoundere, Cameroon in 2007-8. Simple randomisation of patients in WHO clinical stage 1-2 to start of ART early or deferred, i.e. when CD4 counts dropped below 350 versus 250 cells/mm(3), or when they reached clinical stage 3-4. Clinical follow-up every three months were offered for all patients. Main outcomes were clinical stage, CD4 differences and mortality. Of 424 consulting patients, most were excluded, mainly because they were already in WHO stage 3-4. Forty-four patients were randomised.
resultsIn the 'early' group two patients died and five were lost to follow-up. In the 'deferred' group, six patients died and nine were lost to follow-up (Hazard ratio for death by early compared to deferred treatment 0.26, 95% confidence interval 0.05-1.29). Of the patients lost to follow-up, three patients in the 'early' group and four patients in the 'deferred' group were known to be alive when the study ended. Fourteen patients in the early group and 11 in the deferred group started ART. Twenty-two patients were evaluated clinically six to seven months after the study period was terminated. Except for one patient with AIDS, these were all still in clinical stage 1-2.
conclusionsIn our small sample, relative risk for death did not differ significantly, but deferred treatment seemed to carry no increased survival or other clinical advantage. During the study period, other studies made WHO change its guidelines to conform to our early treatment. The tendency in our study lends support to this policy.
trial registrationISRCTN22114173.
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.