Table 3.
Summary of HCV interaction analysis
| Outcome | HCV− (n=328)
|
HCV+ (n=117)
|
P for interaction | Difference between ΔE-L or ratio of ORs | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ΔE-L (95 % CI) or OR (95 % CI) | ΔE-L (95 % CI) or OR (95 % CI) | ||||
| Global DS | ΔE-L | 0.11 (0, 0.22) | −0.22 (−0.4, −0.05) | 0.002 | −0.33 (−0.54, −0.12) |
| Global impairment | OR | 1.7 (1.07, 2.68) | 0.44 (0.21, 0.93) | 0.003 | 0.26 (0.11, 0.62) |
| Verbal fluency DS | ΔE-L | 0.15 (0.01, 0.28) | 0.06 (−0.15, 0.28) | 0.53 | −0.08 (−0.34, 0.17) |
| Verbal fluency impairment | OR | 1.54 (0.81, 2.94) | 0.71 (0.22, 2.25) | 0.25 | 0.46 (0.12, 1.73) |
| Executive functioning DS | ΔE-L | 0.16 (−0.03, 0.36) | −0.08 (−0.39, 0.23) | 0.19 | −0.24 (−0.61, 0.12) |
| Executive functioning impairment | OR | 1.62 (0.99, 2.63) | 0.63 (0.3, 1.32) | 0.04 | 0.39 (0.16, 0.95) |
| Speed of information processing DS | ΔE-L | 0.16 (0.03, 0.28) | −0.12 (−0.32, 0.08) | 0.02 | −0.28 (−0.52, −0.04) |
| Speed of information processing impairment | OR | 2.25 (1.11, 4.59) | 0.53 (0.17, 1.59) | 0.03 | 0.23 (0.06, 0.87) |
| Learning DS | ΔE-L | −0.01 (−0.17, 0.16) | −0.35 (−0.62, −0.08) | 0.04 | −0.34 (−0.66, −0.02) |
| Learning impairment | OR | 1.17 (0.73, 1.89) | 0.43 (0.2, 0.92) | 0.03 | 0.37 (0.15, 0.9) |
| Recall DS | ΔE-L | 0.06 (−0.11, 0.23) | −0.42 (−0.69, −0.15) | 0.004 | −0.47 (−0.79, −0.16) |
| Recall impairment | OR | 1.24 (0.75, 2.03) | 0.33 (0.15, 0.74) | 0.006 | 0.27 (0.1, 0.69) |
| Working memory DS | ΔE-L | 0.14 (−0.03, 0.3) | 0 (−0.27, 0.27) | 0.40 | −0.14 (−0.45, 0.18) |
| Working memory impairment | OR | 1.51 (0.89, 2.58) | 0.8 (0.36, 1.76) | 0.19 | 0.53 (0.2, 1.37) |
| Motor functioning DS | ΔE-L | 0.16 (−0.03, 0.36) | −0.36 (−0.68, −0.05) | 0.006 | −0.53 (−0.9, −0.15) |
| Motor functioning impairment | OR | 1.68 (0.93, 3.01) | 0.42 (0.18, 1.0) | 0.01 | 0.25 (0.09, 0.72) |
In the HCV− and HCV+ columns, ΔE-L indicates the difference between the EFV (E) and LPV/r (L) groups: Positive values indicate that EFV users performed worse than LPV/r users, and negative values indicate the opposite. In analyses of binary impairment outcomes, odds ratios (ORs) >1.0 indicate that EFV users performed worse than LPV/r users, and ORs <1.0 indicate the opposite. p Values <0.10 are bolded