Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2024 Mar 6;19(3):e0290810. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290810

Survival trends among people living with human immunodeficiency virus on antiretroviral treatment in two rural districts in Ghana

Eugene Sackeya 1,2,*, Martin Muonibe Beru 1,3, Richard Nomo Angmortey 1,3, Douglas Aninng Opoku 4,5, Kingsley Boakye 1, Musah Baatira 1,6, Mohammed Sheriff Yakubu 1,7, Aliyu Mohammed 1, Nana Kwame Ayisi-Boateng 8, Daniel Boateng 1,9, Emmanuel Kweku Nakua 1, Anthony Kweku Edusei 10
Editor: Billy Morara Tsima11
PMCID: PMC10917304  PMID: 38446777

Abstract

Background

The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has caused a lot of havoc since the early 1970s, affecting 37.6 million people worldwide. The 90-90-90 treatment policy was adopted in Ghana in 2015 with the overall aim to end new infections by 2030, and to improve the life expectancy of HIV seropositive individuals. With the scale-up of Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy, the lifespan of People Living with HIV (PLWH) on antiretrovirals (ARVs) is expected to improve. In rural districts in Ghana, little is known about the survival probabilities of PLWH on ARVs. Hence, this study was conducted to estimate the survival trends of PLWH on ARVs.

Methods

A retrospective evaluation of data gathered across ARV centres within Tatale and Zabzugu districts in Ghana from 2016 to 2020 among PLWH on ARVs. A total of 261 participants were recruited for the study. The data was analyzed using STATA software version 16.0. Lifetable analysis and Kaplan-Meier graph were used to assess the survival probabilities. “Stptime” per 1000 person-years and the competing risk regression were used to evaluate mortality rates and risk.

Results

The cumulative survival probability was 0.8847 (95% CI: 0.8334–0.9209). The overall mortality rate was 51.89 (95% CI: 36.89–72.97) per 1000 person-years. WHO stage III and IV [AHR: 4.25 (95%CI: 1.6–9.71) p = 0.001] as well as age group (50+ years) [AHR: 5.02 (95% CI: 1.78–14.13) p = 0.002] were associated with mortality.

Conclusion

Survival probabilities were high among the population of PLWH in Tatale and Zabzugu with declining mortality rates. Clinicians should provide critical attention and care to patients at HIV WHO stages III and IV and intensify HIV screening at all entry points since early diagnosis is associated with high survival probabilities.

Background

The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the organism responsible for acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) has caused a lot of havoc to individuals and families since its outbreak in the year 1981[1]. HIV has affected 37.6 million people worldwide as of 2020, with an estimated 27.4 million people accessing antiretroviral therapy (ART) globally [2].

The majority affected by this HIV pandemic live in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) with 20.6 million (55%) of all cases from eastern and southern Africa, while 13.0% (4.7 million) are in western and central Africa [2]. In Ghana, about 342,307 people are living with HIV (PLWH) and of these, 77% of them are receiving lifesaving highly active ART [3]. The therapeutic value of ART for PLWH is undeniable and early initiation reduces morbidity and mortality [4]. It is evident that when HIV replication is suppressed, patients have significant improvement in immunologic status, as seen by higher clusters of differentiation four (CD4) counts, lower AIDS-related morbidity and death, and, in many cases, a return to a normal or near-normal quality of life [4,5]. The advantages of early ART include a reduction in not just classic AIDS-related problems, but also end-stage organ damage as well as non-AIDS-defining malignancies [4,5].

ART administration was introduced in Ghana in June 2003 as part of a comprehensive care package including voluntary counselling and testing (VCT), prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMTCT) of HIV, and the treatment and management of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) [6]. However, only PLWH whose CD4 count was ≤ 350 or classified as being in WHO stages III and IV were initiated on antiretrovirals (ARVs) [6]. Owing to the global impact of the HIV pandemic exceeding all expectations, with a mortality peak of 1.9 million deaths in 2006 to 0.95 million in 2017 [7], the World Health Organization (WHO) and its partners adopted an ambitious treatment target, dubbed the 90-90-90 agenda which was reviewed in 2020 to 95-95-95 [8]. In this policy, 95% of PLWHs should know their status, 95% of those who know their status should be on ARVs and 95% of those on ARVs should achieve viral suppression [8]. This treatment policy is in line with sustainable development goal three which emphasizes the need for good health and well-being of all people by 2030 with HIV being one of the significant indicators [9].

Ghana, a WHO member state adopted the policy in 2015 with efforts made to increase accessibility to HIV counselling and testing services, provision of ARVs for all those living with HIV, and enhance evaluation of the effectiveness of ARVs through viral load assessment at regular intervals at no cost to the clients [3]. In 2019, 58% of PLWH in Ghana knew their HIV status, of this number, 77% are receiving ARVs and 68% of those receiving ARVs had their viral load suppressed [3].

During the early 1980s, to be diagnosed with HIV in Ghana was synonymous with a death sentence, however, with the scale-up of ART, more PLWHs are now receiving the lifesaving ARVs to improve their life expectancy [10]. In Ghana, there is limited data on the survival trends of PLWH. This study therefore sought to estimate the survival trends of PLWH on ARVs for the periods between 2016 to 2020, the mortality rate and the associated risk factors.

Methods

Study design

The study was a retrospective evaluation of data from antiretroviral therapy (ART) sites in two rural districts in Ghana (Zabzugu and Tatale Districts).

Study setting

The study was conducted in the Zabzugu and Tatale districts of the northern region of the Republic of Ghana. These two districts were purposively selected based on their performance at the regional annual reviews for 2019 and 2020 where they were rated among the top five districts in terms of their active testing and search for new cases, the enrollment of all such cases on ART and the quality of their monthly reports in the region. Participants were drawn from four ART centres at the Zabzugu District Hospital (ZDH), Tatale District Hospital (TDH), Kpalbutabu Health Centre -Tatale and Nakpali Health Centre -Zabzugu. The ZDH located in the capital of Zabzugu district was the first to introduce ART service while TDH was marked as a centre located in the district capital two years later. The two health centres located in Zabzugu and Tatale were introduced to reduce the distance of travel for clients who were far from the two centres located at the district capitals.

Study population

The study population included PLWH, 13 years old and above, in the Tatale and Zabzugu districts who were diagnosed and enrolled on ARVs. The study participants were PLWH who started ARVs in 2016 through to 2020. PLWH less than 13 years old at the time of registration due to their dependency on parents and caregivers likely to influence adherence and those who were transferred from districts outside the two districts after they were initiated on ART were excluded.

Sampling technique

The entire cohort of PLWH who started ART in the Zabzugu and Tatale Districts from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2020, with 5 years of follow-up or less based on the year of initiation, were recruited for the study. A total of 261 participants were recruited for this study this constituted the entire number of PLWH who started their treatment from 2016 to 2020 and were eligible for inclusion (Fig 1). A total of 275 PLWH were registered within the period, while 14 participants were excluded from the study as a result of transfers, under age (<13 years) and incomplete information. Most of the participants entered the study at different entry points but 31st December 2021 was the administrative censoring date for all participants.

Fig 1. Inclusion of PLWH for analysis.

Fig 1

Variables description

Dependent variable

The main outcome variable was the survival probabilities of PLWH on ARVs. This predicted the chance of a participant being alive following the initiation to ARVs during the study periods. The secondary outcomes included the mortality rate and the risk factors for mortality.

Independent variables

The study used eleven (11) independent variables. These included the type of regimen the person was on, which is either an efavirenz-based combination or a dolutegravir-based combination, HIV status disclosure refers to disclosing one’s HIV status to anyone other than a healthcare provider, and enrolment on the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS). The remaining variables included the participant’s marital status, WHO HIV stage at the time of diagnosis, client’s locality or area of residence, client’s health facility where ARVs are received, gender and religion.

Data collection and management

Data collection was conducted from 1st July 2022 to 31st August 2022 using a standard checklist by two public health nurses and a postgraduate student of Epidemiology and Biostatistics. This was done by reviewing existing medical records including the patient’s ARVs folder, the pharmacy logbook, the ARVs logbook, and the viral load register. Two different data collection officers collected the same datasets. After a review of the data, two forms from Data Officer One and five forms from Data Officer Two were incomplete and hence were returned for completion. Fourteen forms were dropped because they did not meet the eligibility criteria. The data was validated by comparing the data from the two research assistants to ensure accuracy and consistency. After cleaning, the data was stored in a hard drive and also in a Google drive for future use and protection.

Data analysis

Data was analyzed using the STATA statistical software version 16.0. Percentages, frequencies, median and interquartile range were used to describe participants’ socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. For the person-time computation, the date of administrative censorship (December 31, 2021) was considered the last date for all persons who were still alive and receiving treatment. For the assessment of the survival probabilities, lifetable analysis was done alongside the display of a survival function using a Kaplan-Meier graph to assess variations in survival among subgroups. The overall mortality rate was calculated using stptime per 1000 person-years. The stptime command computed and tabulated the person-time and the incidence rate. The subgroup mortality rates were calculated using stptime adjusting for the subgroup per 1000 person-years. To examine the association between socio-demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics and mortality, the Competing risk regression model was used where loss to follow-up was treated as the competing risk to mortality following the initiation of ARVs. Statistical significance was set at p-value <0.05 at a confidence interval of 95%. Variables (both significant and insignificant at the Univariate level) that were deemed to be important based on previous study [11] were included in the multivariable analysis. The results of the univariate level analysis were reported in the sub-distribution hazard ratio (SHR) while the multivariable level analysis was reported in the adjusted sub-distribution hazard ratio (ASHR).

Ethical consideration

Ethical clearance was granted by the Committee for Human Research, Publication and Ethics of the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology with reference number CHRPE/AP/287/22. Participants informed consent was not taken since this study involved a review of secondary data from hospital medical records and the patients were not available at the time of the data collection. This was explained in the application for the ethical clearance and participants’ consent was waived by the ethics committee. All the study data that were collected were completely anonymized.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics of participants

The study participants who were in the age category of 30 to 39 years were 41.0% with a median age of 35 years (interquartile range, 14 years). More than half (66.28%) of study participants were females while a little over one-third (42.53%) were Christians. Approximately 51.34% resided in the Tatale Sanguli district even though 58.62% received their medications from the Zabzugu district. Those who had no formal education constituted 72.03% of the participants while 61.30% were non-skilled workers. Approximately 89.7% were married and 90.42% of them were registered with the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) (Table 1).

Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of participants.

Variables Zabzugu District Frequency (%) Tatale District Frequency (%) Total (%)
Age (years)
13–19 2 (0.8) 10 (3.8) 12 (4.6)
20–29 32 (12.3) 31 (11.9) 63 (24.2)
30–39 74 (28.4) 33 (12.6) 107 (41.0)
40–49 28 (10.7) 14 (5.4) 42 (16.1)
50+ 17 (6.5) 20 (7.6) 37 (14.1)
Median age (IQR) 35 (14)
Gender
Male 59 (22.6) 29 (11.1) 88 (33.7)
Female 94 (36.0) 79 (30.3) 173 (66.3)
Religion
Christian 50 (19.2) 61 (23.1) 111 (42.5)
Muslim 64 (24.5) 17 (6.5) 81 (31.1)
Traditional 39 (14.9) 30 (11.5) 69 (26.4)
District-of-Residences
Zabzugu district 118 (45.2) 1 (0.4) 119 (45.6)
Tatale district 29 (11.1) 105 (40.2) 134 (51.3)
Other districts 6 (2.3) 2 (0.8) 8 (3.1)
Educational Level
Formal education 36 (13.8) 37 (14.2) 73 (28.0)
No formal education 117 (44.8) 71 (27.2) 188 (72.0)
Occupation
Unemployed 50 (19.2) 30 (11.5) 80 (30.7)
Skilled worker 12 (4.6) 9 (3.5) 21 (8.1)
None skilled worker 91 (34.9) 69 (26.4) 160 (61.3)
Marital Status
Never Married 10 (3.8) 17 (6.5) 27 (10.3)
Ever Married 143 (54.8) 91 (34.9) 234 (89.7)
NHIS Status
Registered with NHIS 139 (53.3) 97 (37.1) 236 (90.4)
Not registered with NHIS 14 (5.4) 11 (4.2) 25 (9.6)

NHIS = National Health Insurance, ZDH = Zabzugu District Hospital, TDH = Tatale District Hospital, IQR: Interquartile range.

Clinical characteristics of the study participants

Table 2 presents the results of the clinical characteristics of the study participants. Majority (64.0%) were diagnosed at WHO stage I and 42.91% had disclosed their HIV status to another person other than the healthcare provider. Most of the participants (83.14%) were on Efavirenz-based Combination. A little over half (52.87%) were alive and traceable at the time of the study while 12.6% were dead.

Table 2. Clinical characteristics of study participants.

Variable Zabzugu District Frequency (%) Tatale District Frequency (%) Total (%)
WHO HIV Stage
Stage I 105 (40.2) 62 (23.8) 167 (64.0)
Stage II 15 (5.7) 25 (9.6) 40 (15.3)
Both stage III & IV 33 (12.6) 21 (8.0) 54 (20.6)
HIV status disclosure
Disclosed 70 (26.8) 42 (16.1) 112 (42.9)
Not disclosed 83 (31.8) 66 (25.3) 149 (57.1)
Combined ARV type
EBC 129 (49.4) 88 (33.7) 217 (83.1)
DBC 24 (9.2) 20 (7.7) 44 (16.9)
ARV’s treatment outcome
Dead 23 (8.8) 10 (3.6) 33 (12.6)
Alive 86 (33.0) 52 (19.9) 138 (52.9)
LTFU 44 (16.9) 46 (17.6) 90 (34.5)

WHO = World Health Organization, HIV = Human Immune Virus, ARV’s = Antiretrovirals, n = Sample Size, LTFU = Loss to Follow Up, DBC = Dolutegravir Based Combination, EBC = Efavirenz Based Combination.

Five-year trend of survival probabilities

A total of 635.981 person-years with 2.17 median person-years of follow-up was contributed by the 261 participants. In the first year of follow-up, 15 mortalities were recorded giving a survival probability of 0.9376 (95% Cl: 0.8987–0.9619) for the period. After three years of follow-up, the cumulative mortality was 32 and a survival probability of 0.8337 (95% CI: 0.7704–0.8809). With a decline in mortalities over the years, the overall mortality at the end of the fifth year was 33 and a survival probability of 0.8049 (95% CI: 0.7145–0.8693) (Table 3).

Table 3. Survival probabilities.

Total person-years 635.981
Median person-years of follow-up 2.17
Years No at-risk Deaths Iterations Survival Probability (95% CI)
0–1 261 15 41 0.9376 (0.8987–0.9619)
1–2 205 10 56 0.8847 (0.8334–0.9209)
2–3 139 7 35 0.8337 (0.7704–0.8809)
3–4 97 0 40 0.8337 (0.7704–0.8809)
4–5 57 1 56 0.8049 (0.7145–0.8693)

CL = Confidence Interval, NO = Number.

Overall, the Kaplan-Meier survival curve revealed that the majority of fatalities occurred in the first to third years after starting ARVs, thus 15, 10 & 7 respectively. Even though the overall cumulative survival probability for the five-year study period was 0.8049, those who were diagnosed at the WHO stages I and II had a higher survival probability as shown in Fig 2 and so was for women and those in the age group of 13–29 years. Patients who did not disclose their HIV status had a higher survival probability than those who disclosed their status but this trend changed after two years of follow-up where the survival probabilities of those who disclosed their status improved.

Fig 2. Kaplan Meier’s survival estimates.

Fig 2

Five-Year Mortality Rates among PLWH on ARVs

Thirty-three (12.64%) participants died during the study period. The total person-years for the five years was 635.98 person-years with an overall mortality rate of 51.89 (95% CI: 36.89–72.97) per 1000 person-years. Mortality rates were above the overall rate among participants 30 years and above, 55.22 (95% CI: 37.60–81.10) per 1000 person-years and males 68.65 (95% CI: 41.39–113.87) per 1000 person-years. The mortality rate was almost even among those who disclosed their HIV status and those who did not with 53.60 (95% CI: 31.75–90.51) per 1000 person-years and 50.69 (95% CI: 32.34–79.48) per 1000 person-years respectively. WHO stage III and IV recorded the highest mortality rate of 123.75 (95% CI: 73.29–208.95) per 1000 person-years.

In the univariate competing risk regression analysis, age was statistically significant and associated with mortality. The hazard of mortality was 3.28 times higher among those aged 50 and above [HR: 3.28; 95% CI: 1.29–8.33, p = 0.013] and remained significant after adjusting for confounders in the multivariable analysis [AHR: 5.02; 95% CI: 1.78–14.13, p = 0.002]. WHO stage was statistically significant, the hazard of mortality was 3.51 times higher among those diagnosed at WHO stage III & IV [HR: 3.51; 95% CI: 1.67–7.38, p = 0.001] and the same was the case after adjusting for confounders [AHR: 4.63; 95% CI: 1.91–11.18, p = 0.001] (Table 4).

Table 4. Mortality rates and their determinants.

Variable (n = 261) Dead PY Mortality Rate per 1000 PY (95%CI) Univariate Analysis SHR (95% CI) P-Value Multivariable Analysis ASHR (95% CI) P-Value
Overall 33 635.98 51.89 (36.89–72.97)
Age (years)
13–19 1 23.57 42.42 (5.98–301.15) 0.92 (0.12–7.09) 0.940 6.33 (0.78–51.08) 0.083
20–29 6 141.58 42.38 (19.04–94.33) 1.12 (0.40–3.12) 0.827 1.72 (0.54–5.50) 0.358
30–39 9 275.51 32.67 (16.10–62.78) 1 1
40–49 8 111.96 71.46 (35.74–142.88) 2.31 (0.90–5.95) 0.082 1.77 (0.60–5.18) 0.298
50+ 9 83.36 107.96 (56.17–207.49) 3.28 (1.29–8.33) 0.013 5.02 (1.78–14.13) 0.002
Gender
Female 18 417.48 43.12 (27.16–68.43) 1 1
Male 15 218.50 68.65 (41.39–113.87) 1.70 (0. 85–3.37) 0.132 1.06 (0.44–2.51) 0.893
Religion
Traditional 6 185.79 32.29 (14.51–71.88) 1 1
Christian 13 255.69 50.84 (29.52–87.56) 1.38 (0.52–3.67) 0.516 2.08 (0.73–5.96) 0.173
Muslim 14 194.50 71.98 (42.63–121.53) 2.20 (0.83–5.79) 0.111 2.74 (0.94–7.99) 0.065
Education
Formal Education 9 150.62 59.75 (31.09–114.84) 1 1
No formal Education 24 485.36 49.45 (33.14–73.77) 1.02 (0.47–2.19) 0.963 0.58 (0.23–1.45) 0.247
Occupation
Unemployed 6 191.11 31.40 (14.10–69.88) 1 1
Skilled worker 3 53.49 56.08 (18.09–173.89) 1.96 (0.49–7.79) 0.337 2.41 (0.43–13.42) 0.315
None Skilled 24 391.38 61.32 (41.10–91.49) 2.06 (0.85–4.99) 0.111 2.23 (0.82–6.07) 0.117
Marital status
Never married 1 59.83 16.71 (2.35–118.66) 1 1
Married 32 576.15 55.54 (39.28–78.54) 3.91 (0.54–28.19) 0.177 5.16 (0.97–27.50) 0.054
NHIS status
Not Registered 3 59.79 50.17 (16.18–155.56) 1 1
Registered 30 576.19 52.07 (36.40–74.47) 1.05 (0.31–3.56) 0.931 1.36 (0.40–4.61) 0.620
Health facility
TDH 10 234.80 42.59 (22.92–79.15) 1 1
ZDH 23 401.18 57.33 (38.10–86.27) 1.66 (0.79–3.48) 0.181 2.05 (0.75–5.60) 0.161
Combined ARV type
DBC 2 77.48 25.81 (6.46–103.21) 1 1
TBC 31 558.50 55.51 (39.04–78.93) 2.71 (0.64–11.46) 0.176 2.16 (0.38–12.45) 0.386
Status disclosure
Not disclosed 19 374.80 50.69 (32.34–79.48) 1 1
Disclosed 14 261.18 53.60 (31.75–90.51) 1.06 (0.53–2.11) 0.861 1.20 (0.57–2.53) 0.628
WHO stage
Stage I 14 436.16 32.10 (19.01–54.20) 1 1
Stage II 5 86.69 57.68 (24.01–138.58) 1.65 (0.60–4.51) 0.332 1.53 (0.50–4.67) 0.454
Stage III&IV 14 113.13 123.75 (73.29–208.95) 3.51 (1.67–7.38) 0.001 4.63 (1.91–11.18) 0.001

n = Sample Size, PY = Person Years, CI = Confidence Interval, Edu = Education, ZDH = Zabzugu District Hospital, TDH = Tatale District Hospital, TBC = Tenofovir Based Combination, DBC = Dolutegravir Based Combination, WHO = World Health Organization, SHR = Sub-division Hazard Ratio, ASHR = Adjusted Sub-division Hazard Ratio.

The hazard of mortality is highest between the first and the second year of follow-up but declined steadily over the rest of the study period from the second year onwards (see Supporting information).

Discussion

Preventing major AIDS-related and non-AIDS-related illnesses in HIV-infected individuals requires early initiation of antiretroviral medication [12]. The majority of the participants were initiated on ARVs at WHO stages I and II (79.31%) and this resonates with earlier reports that most PLWH in Ghana are initiated on ARVs at WHO stages I to III [13,14] This was however different from what was reported in an expanded study involving most of the HIV sentinel sites in Ghana where only 27.7% of PLWH were initiated at WHO stage I and II [15]. The variation in findings could be because the study was conducted during the period of the 90-90-90 treatment policy where there was a more accelerated action for HIV testing and treatment. During that period, testing was done at the OPD instead of the laboratory where only clients who were suspected of being infected were referred for testing. Providing testing services for all persons, whether symptomatic or not, meant that more clients could be diagnosed in the earlier stages of the disease.

The current study identified the majority of PLWH were alive and on treatment at the end of the five years of follow-up. Our findings were a little different from the findings in a study in a primary public hospital of Wukro, Tigray, Ethiopia, where 11% of LTFU was recorded [16]. The reason for the high rate of LTFU could be due to the high numbers diagnosed at WHO stages I and II, who are asymptomatic and may not see the need to take their medications. The overall survival probabilities for the first and fifth years were 0.9376 and 0.8049, respectively. These findings, projected high survival probabilities when compared with another study conducted in the Lawra and Jirapa districts in the Upper West Region of Ghana where the survival probability at the end of the three years was 0.795 per 1000 person-years [17]. The findings were similar to the findings of a study conducted in the Henan province of China from 2005 to 2014 where the cumulated survival for the first and fifth year were 93.7% and 85.3% respectively [18]. The reason for the higher survival probabilities in this study could be due to the removal of all barriers to the initiation of ARVs and early diagnosis due to the 90-90-90 policy which was not the case during the period of the study by Okyere et al. [17].

Significant differences in survival probabilities were observed among specific variables using the Kaplan-Meier survival curve. WHO stages I and II had the highest survival probability and this finding agreed with studies in Ghana’s Upper West Region and Oromiyaa, Ethiopia where WHO stages I and II had the highest survival probability than stages III and IV [17,19]. The prognosis of the disease at WHO stages I and II at the time of diagnosis and subsequent initiation of the ARVs early could account for the above findings. Although disclosure of one’s status may play a role in controlling the spread of HIV, it had very little impact on the improvement of the survival probability of the clients in the short term. However, in the long term, status disclosure could give an individual a better chance of survival compared to someone who has not disclosed the status. The reason for these dynamics could be due to the support that those who disclose their status receive from their treatment supporters. For instance, a study in Ghana reported that HIV status disclosure is significant for having a functional family [20] and family functionality among PLWH also improves treatment outcomes (viral suppression) [14] which could enhance survival probabilities. Females had better survival probabilities than their male counterparts and this could be attributed to the health-seeking behaviors of females [21].

The overall mortality rate observed was low compared with what was found in a retrospective cohort study from 2004–2013 in Nepal [22]. The reason for the reduction in overall mortality in this study may be because the majority of the participants were diagnosed at WHO stages I and II compared to 16.2% which was reported in the Nepal study [22]. Mortality was highest among those diagnosed at the WHO stages III and IV, meaning this group will need special attention, especially within the first two years of diagnosis when most of the deaths occurred. Regular clinic visits, viral load monitoring, and adherence to the ARV regimen are essential to prevent mortalities. Other areas where significant variations in mortality were observed were gender and religion. Morality was high among males compared to females and that could be attributed to the health-seeking behaviors of the male gender [21].

The hazard of mortality after the initiation of ARVs was statistically significant and associated with those in WHO stages III and IV and age group 50+ years and after adjusting in a multivariable analysis, WHO stages III and IV and age group 50+ years remained significant. The findings were similar to other studies that were conducted in Ghana, sub-Saharan Africa, and other parts of the world [18,19,22,23]. From the smooth hazard curve, the risk of mortality was highest in the first and second years of ARV initiation. More pragmatic efforts including regular clinic visits, early diagnosis of opportunistic infections, viral load monitoring and so on, are required to reduce the death rate within the first and second years of ARV initiation.

Strengths and limitations

This is the first study of its kind on this subject in the Zabzugu and Tatale districts and will contribute greatly to the literature and also serve as a baseline finding for future studies in the two districts. The lack of a comparison group restricted our ability to compare the outcome between those initiated on ARVs and those that are not on ARVs. Hence, a comparison was done using previous studies while the presence of missing data also restricted the inclusion of variables such as viral load. Comorbidity and coinfection were also excluded due to the lack of adequate information on such an important variable and that has also limited our analysis.

Conclusion

Survival probabilities were high among PLWH in the two districts compared to previous studies in other districts conducted before the introduction of the treat-all policy. We recommend the need for early diagnosis through testing at all entry points to hospitals and clinics and through the “Know your Status” campaigns for HIV. Clients who are 50 years and above and those who were diagnosed at the WHO stages III and IV should be given shorter clinic visit intervals and ensure viral load monitoring is done as recommended by the National AIDS Control Program.

Supporting information

S1 File. Mortality hazard curve.

(TIF)

pone.0290810.s001.tif (352.7KB, tif)
S1 Data. HIV survitrend data (1) (datasets).

(XLSX)

pone.0290810.s002.xlsx (26.8KB, xlsx)

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to all PLHIV whose records we reviewed for this study. To all the staff of the four ARV centres in both Tatale and Zabzugu, we thank them for their efforts in saving lives and the documentation without which this study would not have been possible. We are also grateful to the management of the two hospitals and the District Directors of Health Services for their approval of the study. We are most grateful to God for the inspiration, guidance and protection throughout the study.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.AIDS.gov. Global HIV/AIDS Timeline [Internet]. KFF. [cited 2023 Nov 20]. https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/timeline/global-hivaids-timeline/.
  • 2.World Health Organization. HIV and AIDS [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2023 Apr 21]. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/hiv-aids.
  • 3.Ghana AIDS Commission. Ghana’s HIV Fact Sheet. Off Pres Ghana. 2019; 523:1–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Lopez-Cortes LF, Gutiérrez-Valencia A, Ben-Marzouk-Hidalgo OJ, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, Seville, Spain. Antiretroviral Therapy in Early HIV Infection. N Engl J Med. 2016. Jan 28;374(4):393–4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.TEMPRANO ANRS 12136 Study Group, Danel C, Moh R, Gabillard D, Badje A, Le Carrou J, et al. A Trial of Early Antiretrovirals and Isoniazid Preventive Therapy in Africa. N Engl J Med. 2015. Aug 27;373(9):808–22. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1507198 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.National HIV/AIDS/ STI Control Programme, Ministry of Health / Ghana Health Service. Guidelines For Antiretroviral Therapy In Ghana. In: 4th edition. 2010. p. 9.
  • 7.Frank TD, Carter A, Jahagirdar D, Biehl MH, Douwes-Schultz D, Larson SL, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and mortality of HIV, 1980–2017, and forecasts to 2030, for 195 countries and territories: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2017. Lancet HIV. 2019. Dec;6(12):e831–59. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3018(19)30196-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS. 90-90-90 treatment target [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2022 Jan 14]. https://www.unaids.org/en/90-90-90.
  • 9.United Nations. THE 17 GOALS | Sustainable Development [Internet]. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 2018 [cited 2021 Jul 11]. https://sdgs.un.org/goals.
  • 10.Weber R, Ruppik M, Rickenbach M, Spoerri A, Furrer H, Battegay M, et al. Decreasing mortality and changing patterns of causes of death in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. HIV Med. 2013. Apr;14(4):195–207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Harmon JL, Barroso J, Pence BW, Leserman J, Salahuddin N. Demographic and Illness-Related Variables Associated with HIV-Related Fatigue. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care JANAC. 2008;19(2):90–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jana.2007.08.005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Anthony F. National Institutes of Health (NIH). 2015 [cited 2023 Mar 7]. Benefits of Early Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV Infection. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/benefits-early-antiretroviral-therapy-hiv-infection.
  • 13.Dwomoh D, Tambaa C, Addo SA, Wiah E, Abdulai M, Bosomprah S. Effect of antiretroviral therapy on all-cause mortality among people living with HIV/AIDS in Ghana using Mahalanobis distant metric matching within propensity score calliper analysis: A retrospective cohort study. PLOS ONE. 2018. Sep 7;13(9):e0203461. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ayisi-Boateng NK, Enimil A, Essuman A, Lawson H, Mohammed A, Aninng DO, et al. Family APGAR and treatment outcomes among HIV patients at two ART Centres in Kumasi, Ghana. Ghana Med J. 2022. Sep;56(3):160–8. doi: 10.4314/gmj.v56i3.5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Abdulai M. 2018 HIV Sentinel Survey Report. 2019;82. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Mehari D, Mache T, Hailemariam L. Predictors of lost to follow up to antiretroviral therapy in primary public hospital of Wukro, Tigray, Ethiopia: A case-control study. J AIDS HIV Res. 2015. Jan 31;7(1):1–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Okyere GA, Alalbil PA, Ping-Naah H, Tifere Y. Determinants of Survival in Adult Hiv Clients on Antiretroviral Therapy in Lawra and Jirapa Districts of Upper West Region, Ghana. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care JIAPAC. 2015. May;14(3):255–60. doi: 10.1177/2325957413500531 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Yao ST, Duan S, Xiang LF, Ye RH, Yang YC, Li YL, et al. [Survival analysis on 3103 HIV/AIDS patients receiving antiretroviral treatment in Dehong prefecture, Yunnan province]. Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi Zhonghua Liuxingbingxue Zazhi. 2010. Nov 1;31(11):1215–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Alemu AW, Sebastián MS. Determinants of survival in adult HIV patients on antiretroviral therapy in Oromiyaa, Ethiopia. Glob Health Action. 2010. Dec;3(1):5398. doi: 10.3402/gha.v3i0.5398 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Ayisi-Boateng NK, Enimil A, Mohammed A, Essuman A, Lawson H, Opoku Aninng D, et al. Predictors of family functionality amongst human immunodeficiency virus-serodiscordant couples in two major hospitals in Kumasi, Ghana. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2020. Jun 9;12(1):e1–6. doi: 10.4102/phcfm.v12i1.2355 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Thompson AE, Anisimowicz Y, Miedema B, Hogg W, Wodchis WP, Aubrey-Bassler K. The influence of gender and other patient characteristics on health care-seeking behaviour: a QUALICOPC study. BMC Fam Pract. 2016. Mar 31;17(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s12875-016-0440-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Angdembe MR, Rai A, Bam K, Pandey SR. Predictors of mortality in adult people living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy in Nepal: A retrospective cohort study, 2004–2013. Maiga AI, editor. PLOS ONE. 2019. Apr 23;14(4):e0215776. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215776 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Mangal TD, Meireles MV, Pascom ARP, de Almeida Coelho R, Benzaken AS, Hallett TB. Determinants of survival of people living with HIV/AIDS on antiretroviral therapy in Brazil 2006–2015. BMC Infect Dis. 2019. Feb 28;19(1):206. doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-3844-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Billy Morara Tsima

10 Nov 2023

PONE-D-23-25825Survival trends among people living with human immunodeficiency virus on antiretroviral treatment in two rural districts in GhanaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Sackeya,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 25 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Billy Morara Tsima, MD MSc

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information. 

3. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: There are some language errors in the text, mainly that at times it is unclear which study the author is referring to. I have made some language suggestions in the attached document. The referencing should be reviewed, there are more recent and widely accepted references for early ART initiation, some of the references are not the original source. Kindly review and cite the original sources.

The data presented does not really support the conclusions. Whereas there is a lot of evidence that early ART initiation enhances survival outcomes it is not shown in this study as there is no comparator. Perhaps a comparison of survival before and after Treat all would have been more appropriate and would support the authors assertion that " survival probabilities have improved significantly among PLWH in the two districts". Currently the study reads more like a description of survival of PLWHI who are on ART.

The setting description may be better with a description of HIV services, general mortality rates etc of the district. It is unclear to me why the two districts were selected, what does "active involvement in ART mean"?

The authors say they used competing risk analysis, I believe they should state in the methods what the competing risk was( or the typeof competing risk) and that they used subdivision hazard ratios. One of the independent variables mentioned in the methods- comorbidity/coinfection is not accounted for in the results.

The results should also account for and explain the excluded samples. This is an important independent variable as it could include HIV define illnesses )WHO stage 3 or 4) or non-communicable diseases with cardiovascular complications e.g. hypertension and Diabetes which may cause competing causes of death.

The rest of my comments are shown in the attachment.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript was very detailed, easy to comprehend and results were explained in a lucid manner. The authors did a good job in understanding the importance of the topic and presenting it in a precise manner.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-23-25825_30Sept.pdf

pone.0290810.s003.pdf (1.3MB, pdf)
PLoS One. 2024 Mar 6;19(3):e0290810. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290810.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


24 Dec 2023

Academic Editor

Comments: Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Response: We appreciate your valuable comments. These changes have been made in the revised manuscript.

List of references removed from the revised draft

zolopa AR. The evolution of HIV treatment guidelines: Current state-of-the-art of ART. Antiviral Res. 2010 Jan;85(1):241–4.

Owusu-ansah Y. Socio-economic effect of HIV / AIDS in Ghana. 2009;(December 2002). Available from: https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/features/Socio-economic effect-of-HIV-AIDS-in-Ghana-3098

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV Basics | HIV/AIDS | CDC [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2022 Apr 6]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/index.html

Ghana Statistical Service. Zabzugu district. 2010. 1–10 p.

Ghana Statistical Service. Tatale sanguli district. 2010. 1–10 p.

List of references currently included that were not part of the original draft.

AIDS.gov. Global HIV/AIDS Timeline [Internet]. KFF. [cited 2023 Nov 20]. Available from: https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/timeline/global-hivaids-timeline/

Lopez-Cortes LF, Gutiérrez-Valencia A, Ben-Marzouk-Hidalgo OJ, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, Seville, Spain. Antiretroviral Therapy in Early HIV Infection. N Engl J Med. 2016 Jan 28;374(4):393–4.

TEMPRANO ANRS 12136 Study Group, Danel C, Moh R, Gabillard D, Badje A, Le Carrou J, et al. A Trial of Early Antiretrovirals and Isoniazid Preventive Therapy in Africa. N Engl J Med. 2015 Aug 27;373(9):808–22.

Ayisi-Boateng NK, Enimil A, Essuman A, Lawson H, Mohammed A, Aninng DO, et al. Family APGAR and treatment outcomes among HIV patients at two ART Centres in Kumasi, Ghana. Ghana Med J. 2022 Sep;56(3):160–8.

Ayisi-Boateng NK, Enimil A, Mohammed A, Essuman A, Lawson H, Opoku Aninng D, et al. Predictors of family functionality amongst human immunodeficiency virus-serodiscordant couples in two major hospitals in Kumasi, Ghana. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2020 Jun 9;12(1):e1–6.

Reviewer 1

Comments: There are some language errors in the text, mainly that at times it is unclear which study the author is referring to. I have made some language suggestions in the attached document.

Response: The language errors have been addressed in the revised manuscript.

Comments: The use of the abbreviation HAART and ART

Response: Your concern of the use of the terms HAART and ART concurrently have been addressed. Whiles the meaning as used in this work is relatively different, to avoid creating confusion among readers, we have dropped the abbreviation HAART and will maintain the abbreviation ART throughout this manuscript.

Comment: A more relevant setting description would relate to the provision of HIV care in these districts

Response: This has been duly revised to reflect the provision of care to PLWH in the two districts

“These two districts were purposively selected based on their performance at the regional annual reviews for 2019 and 2020 where they were rated among the top five districts in terms of their active testing and search for new cases, the enrollement of all such cases on ART and the quality of their monthly reports.. Participants were drawn from four ART centers at the Zabzugu district hospital (ZDH), Tatale district hospital (TDH), Kpalbutabu Health Center -Tatale and Nakpali Health Center -Zabzugu. The Zabzugu district hospital located in the capital was the first to introduce ART service while Tatale District Hospital was marked as a center located at the district capital two years later. The two health centers located in Zabzugu and Tatale were introduced to reduce the distance of travel for clients who were far from the two centers located at the district capitals”

Comments: It is unclear what the competing risk in this study were. Since the outcome of interest is death. This is not my area of expertise but it seems KM estimates are not recommended if considering competing risks, cumulative incidence may be better. In the results the auther does show SHR in one of the tables but it should be mentioned here as well

Response: The competing risk has been clearly stated following the request, we think it was an oversight.

KM estimates targets objective one where we are looking at the survival probabilities. It serves as sub analysis providing information on survival probabilities among sub-groups.

Competing risk on the other hand targets a different objective where we are trying to estimate the mortality hazards among PLWH on ARVs. Because the model can provide hazard ratios taking into consideration the people who are lost to follow-up, a property that other models such as cocks proportional hazard lacks, made it suitable for consideration looking at the number of people who were lost to follow-up in this study. This makes the KM estimates and the competing risk regression independent of each other and we think it’s possible to maintain both in the manuscript.

The SHR as seen in the results has also been duly captured in the methodology as suggested.

Comments: Not clear why 13years old are the cut-off

Response: In the era of treat all, PLWH do not need a treatment supporter. This is not the case with children as they continue to rely on their parents for their medication as well as their support to take them. In the study setting, child care or upbringing is a whole family affair and mothers will do anything to conceal their HIV status including failure to go for ARVs for the children. Already child mortalities are high in the study setting caused by many factors including anemia associated with malaria, malnutrition, pneumonia, etc. For a survival analysis which is, retrospective in nature, it will be difficult to control all the other factors of mortality and that is why we failed to report on the co-morbidity and co-infection in the results as you rightly mentioned in your review. These are the reasons for which the authors restricted the analysis to 13years and above.

Comment: Please describe- typical census means all participants within a defined area are included (complete enumeration) therefore it is not sampling

Response: The use of census was in context to mean all PLWH initiated on ARVs between 1st January 2016 to 31st December 2020 however, to have used census and sampling at the same time appears contradictory hence we have revised that section to read,

“The entire cohort of PLWH who started ART in the Zabzugu and Tatale Districts from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2020, with 5 years of follow-up or less based on the year of initiation, were recruited for the study”.

Comment: Comorbidity/coinfection not accounted for in the results.

Response: This is true and we have reviewed the methodology to reflect only what was accounted for in the results section.

Comment: This should be accounted for, how many were returned to be completed, what was missing and how many were dropped, it may also be helpful to di a sub analysis, “Two different data collection officers collected the same data set and incomplete forms were returned to be completed and those that were not completed for lack of adequate information were dropped”.

Response: This has been accounted for as requested.

“Two different data collection officers collected the same data set. Two incomplete forms from data officer one and five forms from data officer two were returned to be completed. Fourteen forms were dropped because they did not meet the eligibility criteria.”

Comments: This should be clearer or more precise.

“. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the baseline characteristics of participants including the socio-demographic and the clinical characteristics”

Response: This has also been revised to read,

“Percentages, frequencies, median and interquartile range were used to describe the participants socio-demographic and the clinical characteristics”

Comments: Flow chart of final sample size

Response: This has been duly provided

Comment: Generally, this is not used for formal inference. I would recommend using it as an appendix

Response: The recommendation well acknowledged and estimated curve of mortality hazard figure moved to the appendix.

Comments: The referencing should be reviewed, there are more recent and widely accepted references for early ART initiation, some of the references are not the original source. Kindly review and cite the original sources.

Response: All the references have been addressed in the revised manuscript as suggested. The START and Temprano studies the reviewer recommended have also been useful as they strengthen the evidence of the current study.

Comments: The data presented does not really support the conclusions. Whereas there is a lot of evidence that early ART initiation enhances survival outcomes it is not shown in this study as there is no comparator. Perhaps a comparison of survival before and after Treat all would have been more appropriate and would support the author’s assertion that “survival probabilities have improved significantly among PLWH in the two districts". Currently the study reads more like a description of survival of PLWHI who are on ART.

Response: The use of a comparator would have enhanced the study’s findings. All PLWH were enrolled on ART due to the change in the treatment policy and the study design made it difficult to identify those who were not on ART to serve as a comparator. What the authors did to arrive at the conclusion that there was improvement in survival was to compare the findings with similar studies that were conducted before the treat-all era. The reviewer assertion that instead of improvement of survival we should use high survival rate is well appreciated as this will make it more understanding. We have therefore revised it accordingly.

“Survival probabilities were high among PLWH in the Zabzugu and Tatale districts compared to previous studies in other districts conducted before the introduction of the treat-all policy”.

Comments: The authors say they used competing risk analysis, I believe they should state in the methods what the competing risk was (or the type of competing risk) and that they used subdivision hazard ratios. One of the independent variables mentioned in the methods- comorbidity/coinfection is not accounted for in the results

Response: This has also been addressed as recommended

”To examine the association between socio-demographics, clinical characteristics and mortality, the Competing risk regression model was used where loss to follow-up was treated as the competing risk to mortality following the initiation of ARVs”.

Comments: The results should also account for and explain the excluded samples. This is an important independent variable as it could include HIV define illnesses) WHO stage 3 or 4) or non-communicable diseases with cardiovascular complications e.g. hypertension and Diabetes which may cause competing causes of death.

Response: Due to the retrospective nature, data on this sensitive variable was sparse, limiting our ability to do sub-analysis. In light of the reviewer’s assessment, we have revised the methodology to address the point on comorbidity and coinfection where variables that are not captured in the results are not included in the methods section.

Reviewer 2

Comments: The manuscript was very detailed, easy to comprehend and results were explained in a lucid manner. The authors did a good job in understanding the importance of the topic and presenting it in a precise manner.

Response: Thank you for these comments.

Attachment

Submitted filename: AUTHORS RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS COMMENTS.pdf

pone.0290810.s004.pdf (272.9KB, pdf)

Decision Letter 1

Billy Morara Tsima

9 Jan 2024

Survival trends among people living with human immunodeficiency virus on antiretroviral treatment in two rural districts in Ghana

PONE-D-23-25825R1

Dear Dr. Sackeya,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Billy Morara Tsima, MD MSc

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Billy Morara Tsima

26 Feb 2024

PONE-D-23-25825R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Sackeya,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Billy Morara Tsima

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File. Mortality hazard curve.

    (TIF)

    pone.0290810.s001.tif (352.7KB, tif)
    S1 Data. HIV survitrend data (1) (datasets).

    (XLSX)

    pone.0290810.s002.xlsx (26.8KB, xlsx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PONE-D-23-25825_30Sept.pdf

    pone.0290810.s003.pdf (1.3MB, pdf)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: AUTHORS RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS COMMENTS.pdf

    pone.0290810.s004.pdf (272.9KB, pdf)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES