CD4/CD8 ratio and CD8+ T-cell count as prognostic markers for non-AIDS mortality in people living with HIV. A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: In people living with HIV (PLHIV), the CD4/CD8 ratio has been proposed as a useful marker for non-AIDS events. However, its predictive ability on mortality over CD4 counts, and the role of CD8+ T-cell counts remain controversial. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysi...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad Francisco de Vitoria |
| Repositorio: | DDFV. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Francisco de Vitoria |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ddfv.ufv.es:10641/5197 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/10641/5197 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | HIV CD4/CD8 ratio Mortality Comorbidities Non-AIDS events |
| Sumario: | Background: In people living with HIV (PLHIV), the CD4/CD8 ratio has been proposed as a useful marker for non-AIDS events. However, its predictive ability on mortality over CD4 counts, and the role of CD8+ T-cell counts remain controversial. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies from 1996 to 2023, including PLHIV on antiretroviral treatment, and reporting CD4/CD8 ratio or CD8+ counts. The primary outcome was non-AIDS mortality or all-cause mortality. We performed a standard random-effects pairwise meta-analysis comparing low versus high CD4/CD8 ratio with a predefined cut-off point of 0.5. (CRD42020170931). Findings: We identified 2,479 studies for screening. 20 studies were included in the systematic review. Seven studies found an association between low CD4/CD8 ratio categories and increased mortality risk, with variable cut-off points between 0.4-1. Four studies were selected for meta-analysis, including 12,893 participants and 618 reported deaths. Patients with values of CD4/CD8 ratio below 0.5 showed a higher mortality risk (OR 3.65; 95% CI 3.04 - 4.35; I2 = 0.00%) compared to those with higher values. While the meta-analysis of CD8+ T-cell counts was not feasible due to methodological differences between studies, the systematic review suggests a negative prognostic impact of higher values (>1,138 to 1,500 cells/uL) in the long term. Conclusions: Our results support the use of the CD4/CD8 ratio as a prognostic marker in clinical practice, especially in patients with values below 0.5, but consensus criteria on ratio timing measurement, cut-off values, and time to event are needed in future studies to get more robust conclusions. |
|---|