Skip to main content

Table 3 Hazard ratios from Cox Proportional Hazards models comparing the association between presenting with advanced HIVa and time to and clinical outcomesa (N = 957)

From: Characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients presenting with advanced HIV disease in the “treat all” era: a retrospective cohort study from rural Rwanda

 

Crude analysis

Adjusted analysisb

Maximally adjustedc

 

HRf

95% CI

p-value

aHRf

95% CI

p-value

aHRf

95% CI

p-value

First VL test

1.5

1.2, 2.0

0.001

1.2

0.9, 1.6

0.167

1.1

0.8, 1.5

0.442

First viral suppression

1.3

1.0, 1.7

0.040

1.1

0.8, 1.4

0.562

1.0

0.8, 1.4

0.949

Death

5.3

2.5, 11.2

 < 0.001

4.4

1.9, 10.2

 < 0.001

4.8

2.0, 11.6

0.001

Treatment failured

1.3e

0.8, 1.9

0.247

1.7

1.1, 2.5

0.017

1.9

1.2, 3.0

0.005

  1. aDefined as presenting to care with CD4 < 200 or WHO Stage 3 and 4
  2. bAdjusted for district, age, sex, and distance to health facility
  3. cAdjusted for district, age, sex, distance to health facility, BMI, and method of enrollment
  4. dTreatment failure was composite outcome that included death, loss to follow-up, or virological failure where virological failure which was defined as having a viral load ≥ 200 copies/ml among those who had previously achieved viral suppression
  5. eProportional hazards assumption was violated for this model and the hazard ratio should be interpreted as the incidence rate ratio over the 630-day follow-up rather than an instantaneous hazard
  6. fHR: Hazard ratio, aHR: adjusted Hazard ratio
Back to article page

BMC Infectious Diseases

ISSN: 1471-2334

Contact us