Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 May 14;16(5):e0251648. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251648

Incidence and predictors of mortality within the first year of antiretroviral therapy initiation at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: A retrospective follow up study

Agazhe Aemro 1,*, Mulugeta Wassie 1, Basazinew Chekol 2
Editor: Giordano Madeddu3
PMCID: PMC8121335  PMID: 33989330

Abstract

Background

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is one of the most fatal infectious diseases in the world, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, including Ethiopia. Even though Antiretroviral therapy (ART) significantly decreases mortality overall, death rates are still highest especially in the first year of ART initiation.

Objective

To assess the incidence and predictors of mortality within the first year of ART initiation among adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia.

Methods

A retrospective follow-up study was conducted among 514 newly enrolled adults to ART from 2014 to 2018 at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital. Patients’ chart number was selected from the computer using a simple random sampling technique. Data were entered into EPI- INFO 7.2.2.6 and analyzed using Stata 14.0. The mortality rate within the first year was computed and described using frequency tables. Both bivariable and multivariable Cox-proportional hazard models were fitted to show predictors of early mortality.

Results

Out of 494 patient records included in the analysis, a total of 54 deaths were recorded within one year follow-up period. The overall mortality rate within 398.37 person years (PY) was 13.56 deaths/100 PY with the higher rate observed within the first three months. After adjustment, rural residence (Adjusted Hazard Ratio (AHR) = 1.97; 95% CI: 1.05–3.71), ≥ 6 months pre-ART duration (AHR = 2.17; 95% CI: 1.24–3.79), ambulatory or bedridden functional status at enrolment (AHR = 2.18; 95% CI: 1.01–4.74), and didn’t take Cotrimoxazole preventive therapy (CPT) during follow-up (AHR = 1.88; 95% CI: 1.04–3.41) were associated with early mortality of adults on ART.

Conclusion

Mortality within the first year of ART initiation was high and rural residence, longer pre-Art duration, ambulatory or bedridden functional status and didn’t take CPT during follow-up were found to be independent predictors. Hence, giving special attention for patients from rural area and provision of CPT is crucial to reduce mortality.

Introduction

An infection with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) can lead to AIDS which results in a gradual decline and failure of the immune system. Once the immune system became compromised, the patient becomes highly susceptible to life-threatening infection and results in early death. HIV/AIDS is one of the most fatal infectious diseases in the world, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, it had a massive impact on health outcomes and life expectancy [1].

Even though there is a substantial decline in mortality of patients with AIDS, still many people with the disease were dying. Based on Global HIV/AIDS statistics of 2020 fact sheets, in 2019, around 690,000 people died from AIDS-related illnesses worldwide [2]. Now a day treatment for patients with HIV infection is available. But HIV-infected individuals, especially in Africa including Ethiopia, still hesitates to start the treatment early which results in progression of the disease to the advanced stage. This intern results in risk of early mortality for patients with HIV [35].

In Ethiopia, HIV-infected patients hesitate to start ART as early as possible due to different reasons. Of these, fear of stigma in the broader community is the most common reason to delay in receiving treatment. Additionally, lack of knowledge about the benefits of ART and belief that using ART was prohibited by God were other factors contributing to hesitate in using ART. But, it could be overcome with continuous education and counseling of patients about the benefits of ART and U = U (undetectable = un-transmittable). Education of patients about U = U has numerous advantages and maximizes the wellbeing of people living with HIV. It offers attainment of viral suppression, strengthening patients’ motivation to initiate and adhere to antiretroviral regimens, and used in alleviating self-stigma [6].

The introduction and subsequent optimization of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) greatly improved the prognosis of AIDS and the occurrence of other associated events. But, ART drug discontinuation in some people living with HIV (PLHIV) as a result of adverse drug reaction is one of the factors that leads to bad outcome including early mortality. The type of first line ART drug used also determines ART drug tolerability and discontinuation. In some studies, high rate of drug discontinuation was reported among individuals on Dolutegravir (DTG) based regimen as a result of its gastrointestinal or neuropsychological toxicities. From studies conducted in Italy, the rate of DTG based regimen discontinuation was reported between 9.2% and 44% [7, 8]. This drug interruption results in the decline of immunity so that the patient will exposed to opportunistic infections and preventable early mortality.

Antiretroviral therapy significantly decreases mortality overall, but death rates are also highest in the first year, especially, first three months after ART initiation. Opportunistic infections (OIs), immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS), as well as early adverse drug reactions especially in the first three months of treatment, may be developed. Death rates after initiation of ART are more common when patients start ART with advanced HIV disease stage, with existing comorbidities, severely low baseline clinical and immunological markers like low hemoglobin, low Cluster of Differentiation Four (CD4) cell counts [9, 10], or severely malnourished status. Poor adherence in the first year of ART initiation is also another risk factor that can result in early mortality [4, 1113].

Patient’s Access to ART both in developed and developing countries is improved so that death rates became subsequently decreased. However, the death rate of HIV infected patients in resource-limited countries is still high as compared to those patients from the developed world. This is true especially in the early months after ART initiation. Therefore, in order to reduce such early mortality, identification of possible risk factors is important [14].

Even though survival in HIV-infected patients has improved with Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy (HAART), still there is a high risk of mortality due to late presentation which is defined as the coming of HIV-infected individuals for care with a CD4 count below 350 cells/mL [15, 16]. The longer the therapy is delayed, the more the CD4 cell count drops and the poorer the patient outcome. Additionally, delayed presentation for care results in delayed treatment, higher medical costs, and an increased risk of disease transmission by infected individuals who were unaware of their infection status [17, 18].

Different studies identified different factors that can determine the occurrence of early mortality among HIV-infected patients on ART. From these, male sex, advanced age, Tuberculosis (TB) co-infection, low baseline CD4 count, low body mass index, pre-ART viral load, advanced disease stage, bedridden or ambulatory functional status, and low baseline hemoglobin level were stated as independent predictors of mortality. Similarly, factors related to treatment like ART regimen change and poor ART adherence were commonly identified as predictors of early mortality among patients on ART [13, 1922].

A retrospective cohort study conducted in Harar and Debre-Markos, Ethiopia, showed that mortality of patients on HAART was high. It stated that majority of the death occurred in the first three months of ART initiation. World Health Organization (WHO) clinical stage III and IV, CD4 counts less than 50 cells/μl, not taking Cotrimoxazole Prophylaxis Treatment at the baseline were the identified predictors for early mortality after ART initiation [14, 23].

There is no study conducted in the current study area especially after 2014 after which HIV treatment guidelines were changed. Therefore, this study aimed to assess incidence of the mortality rate and its predictors at Debre-Markos referral hospital.

Method and materials

Study design, setting and period

An institution based retrospective follow up study was conducted at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital which is found in Debre Markos town, northwest Ethiopia. Since the start of HIV care, the hospital has providing ART service for around 6, 350 patients and 5, 839 were adults. Of this, 1264 HIV infected adults were enrolled in to ART Clinic between Jan 1, 2014 and December 31, 2018.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

All adults age 15 years and above who were newly started ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital from Jan 1, 2014 to December 31, 2018, were included in this study. Patients with transferred in record information were excluded.

Sample size and sampling procedure

Sample size was estimated by using single population proportion formula through EPI INFO statistical package version 7.2.2.6 with the assumption of 95% level of confidence, proportion (P) of 12.5% [24], 3% marginal error, and Power 80%. With these assumptions calculated sample size became 467 and by considering 10% expected incomplete record, the final sample size was 514. Between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018, about 1264 adult patients were enrolled to ART, and 1117 fulfill the inclusion criteria. The patients’ chart number was taken from the electronic data base of the Hospital, and 514 charts were selected through a computer generated random number.

Operational definition

Death or mortality

Defined as any recorded AIDS-related deaths other than deaths due to accidents like car accident, bullet injury, and any suicidal act.

Functional status of patients

Classified according to the WHO criteria as working(W): capably of going out of home and do routine activities including the daily work; Ambulatory (A): capable of self-care and going to the toilet unsupported; Bed-ridden (B): cannot go even to the toilet unsupported [25].

Baseline WHO clinical stages

Taken from chart record at enrolment to ART based on WHO classification criteria for HIV/AIDS patients and labeled as stage I to IV.

Anemia

In this study anemia is defined as anemic or not-anemic based on WHO criteria: i.e. Hemoglobin concentration <12 g/dl for females and <13 g/dl for males [26].

ART adherence

In this study adherence level to ART drug is classified as, Good (≥95% adherence or missing 1 out of 30 doses or missing 2 out of 60 doses), Fair (85–94% adherence or missing 2–4 out of 30 doses or missing 4–9 out of 60 doses), Poor (less than 85% or missing ≥5 doses of 30 doses or ≥ 10 dose out of 60 doses) [27].

Past opportunistic infection

The presence of opportunistic infection/s after HIV diagnosis and before ART start.

Past CPT treatment

A patient took CPT after HIV diagnosis and before ART start to prevent the occurrence of OIs.

Past Isoniazid (INH) prophylaxis

A patient took INH prophylaxis after HIV diagnosis and before ART start to prevent the occurrence of tuberculosis for those who were ruled out from Tuberculosis disease based on the record on the patients’ chart, irrespective of the type of laboratory performed.

Past TB treatment history

A patient took anti-tuberculosis treatment before the start of ART.

Data collection tools and procedures

In order to extract data from the patients’ chart, a tool was developed from HIV/AIDS care monitoring and evaluation sheet. In preparing of the tool, forms used for laboratory request and ART intake were considered and incorporated. Prior to data collection, training was given for data collectors regarding the tool and the way they extract the data from the chart. Three trained nurses who had experience on HIV care were recruited for data collection. By using a computer generated simple random sampling technique, patient charts from which actual data taken were selected with the help of medical record number (MRN). Patient’s chart was picked up from the chart room using MRN and then data were extracted from the patient’s medical charts by using the tool. Common code was given for each selected chart after data was extracted so that there was no chance of recollection of data from a similar chart.

Data quality control

Pretested data extraction tool was used to maintain data quality. Quality also maintained by extracting data using trained nurses and close monitoring of the procedure by the supervisor. Data clerks were involved upon the selection of patients’ chart from the computer as well as from the chart room. Before returning of the chart to the shelf, completeness of data extraction tool was checked and necessary correction was made.

Data processing and analysis

After the data were extracted from the chart, it was first checked for consistency and completeness. After that it was coded and entered to EPI INFO version 7.2.2.6 and exported to STATA version 14.0 for analysis. A statistical summary was applied to describe socio demographic, clinical and follow up variables of the study. Incidence of death within the follow-up period was calculated and expressed as per 100 person years. Kaplan-Meier was used to describe survival of patients within the follow-up period. Model fitness was checked by using Schoenfield residual test (p-value = 0.1228) and goodness of fit was checked by using Cox-Snell residual test. Bi-variable analysis was checked for each variable and those variables with p-value < 0.2 was entered to multivariable Cox-proportional hazard model to identify predictors of early mortality of patients after ART initiation. 95% CI of hazard ratio was computed and variables having p-value < 0.05 in the multivariate Cox proportional hazards model were considered as significant predictors of mortality within the first year.

Ethical consideration

Ethical clearance was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the University of Gondar. Upon the ethical clearance, a letter of cooperation was obtained from the school of nursing to collect data. Prior to extracting the data from the patients’ chart, permission was obtained from Debre-Markos Hospital Medical director and ART focal person. Confidentiality was maintained and the data were fully anonymized.

Results

Baseline socio demographic characteristics of study participants

Out of all patients enrolled to the ART Clinic from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018, 514 charts were selected and reviewed based on the inclusion criteria. From these, 494 were included in the analysis and the remaining 20 (3.89%) charts were excluded due to data incompleteness.

Off all patient’ charts included in the analysis, 303(61.34%) were females and the median age was 33 years (Inter Quartile Range (IQR): 27–40 years). More than half (54.05%) of the total subjects got married and around 34.62% had no formal education. Majority (78.54%) of the patients were urban dwellers and a total of 450 (91.09%) patients had disclosed their HIV status (Table 1).

Table 1. Mortality rate within one year follow-up period stratified by socio-demographic characteristics of adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2018 (n = 494).

Characteristics Frequency (%) Person year Died Censored Death incidence per 100 PY (95% CI)
Sex
 Male 191 (38.66) 147.06 24 167 16.32 (10.94, 24.35)
 Female 303 (61.34) 251.32 30 273 11.94 (8.35, 17.07)
Age in years
 15–24 61 (12.35) 51.94 4 57 7.70 (2.89, 20.52)
 25–34 200 (40.48) 160.79 21 179 13.06 (8.52, 20.03)
 35–44 160 (32.39) 126.59 19 141 15.01 (9.57, 23.53)
 ≥45 73 (14.78) 59.05 10 63 16.94 (9.11, 31.48)
Religion
 Orthodox 472 (95.55) 381.24 51 421 13.38 (10.17, 17.60)
 Muslim 20 (4.05) 15.99 3 17 18.75 (6.05, 58.14)
 Others b 2 (0.40) 1.13 0 2 0
Marital status
 Single 62 (12.55) 42.59 9 53 21.13 (10.99, 40.61)
 Married 267 (54.05) 216.22 24 243 11.09 (7.44, 16.56)
Divorced/separated 129 (26.11) 110.57 16 113 14.47 (8.87, 23.62)
 Widowed 36 (7.29) 28.99 5 31 17.25 (7.18, 41.44)
Educational level
 No education 171 (34.62) 138.67 17 154 12.26 (7.62, 19.72)
 Primary 113 (22.87) 92.37 8 105 8.66 (4.33, 17.32)
 Secondary+ 210 (42.51) 167.33 29 181 17.33 (12.04, 24.94)
Residence
 Rural 106 (21.46) 80.87 16 90 19.79 (12.12, 32.29)
 Urban 388 (78.54) 317.50 38 350 11.97 (8.71, 16.45)
Occupation
 Employed 163 (33.00) 123.11 22 141 17.87 (11.77, 27.14)
 Unemployed 331 (67.00) 275.26 32 299 11.63 (8.22, 16.44)
Household number
 ≤ 2 person 197 (39.88) 155.57 26 171 16.71 (11.38, 24.55)
 >2 person 297 (60.12) 242.80 28 269 11.53 (7.96, 16.70)
HIV disclosure status
 Disclosed 450 (91.09) 362.47 47 403 12.97 (9.74, 17.26)
 Not disclosed 44 (8.91) 35.91 7 37 19.49 (9.29, 40.89)

b Protestant and Catholic.

CI: Confidence Interval; PY: Person-Year.

Mortality rate within the first year of ART initiation stratified by socio-demographic characteristics

In one year follow-up period, 494 subjects were followed for a total of 398.37 PY observations. The median follow-up period was 12 months (IQR: 7.23–12) with minimum and maximum follow-ups of 0.93 and 12 months respectively.

Fifty-four (10.93%; 95% CI: 8.72, 13.62) non-injury related deaths occurred in one year follow-up period with an overall density of 13.56 deaths per 100 PYs (95%CI: 10.38, 17.69). From total deaths that occurred during the follow-up period, more than half (55.56%) were females but the death rate was high in males than females which was 16.32 and 11.94 deaths per 100 PYs, respectively. The highest death rate was observed in the group among subjects age 45 years and above which was 16.94 deaths per 100 PYs. From the cohort, a higher death rate was observed among subjects from a rural area and also it was higher (19.49 deaths per 100 PY) among participants who didn’t disclose their HIV status (Table 1).

Baseline and follow up clinical and immunological characteristics of study participants

Out of 494 study participants with complete information for analysis, more than two-thirds (70.85%) of them had started ART within six months of HIV status confirmation and only 16% had past opportunistic infection. A total of 215 (43.52%) patients were in baseline WHO clinical stage I and the median baseline CD4 count was 314.5 cells/μl (IQR: 147–443). Three hundred and two (61.13%) participants were found to be grouped under the 18.5 to 24.9 kg/m2 category of body mass index (BMI). At baseline, 166 (33.60%) patients were anemic, and also majority of (79.35%) the patients had working functional status at baseline.

From those patient charts included in the analysis, about two-third (65%) had taken CPT and less than half (39.47%) of the patients took Isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) during the follow up period. On one year follow-up time, 43 (8.70%) patients on ART developed tuberculosis (TB). At baseline, almost all (94.53%) of the patients start ART with the category of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate-Lamivudine- Efavirenz (TDF-3TC-EFV), and around 29% of patients experience fair or poor ART adherence during the follow up period (Table 2).

Table 2. Mortality rate stratified by baseline and follow up clinical and immunological characteristics of adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2018 (n = 494).

Characteristics Frequency (%) Person year Died Censored Death/100 PY (95% CI)
Pre-ART duration
 < 6 month 350 (70.85) 280.73 29 321 10.33 (7.18, 14.87)
 ≥ 6 month 144 (29.15) 117.64 25 119 21.25 (14.36, 31.45)
Past OI
 Yes 79 (15.99) 65.63 7 72 10.67 (5.09, 22.37)
 No 415 (84.01) 332.75 47 368 14.12 (10.61, 18.79)
Past CPT treatment
 Yes 93 (18.83) 82.62 7 86 8.47 (4.04, 17.77)
 No 401 (81.17) 315.75 47 354 14.89 (11.18, 19.81)
Past INH prophylaxis
 Yes 15 (3.04) 14.16 0 15 0
 No 479 (96.96) 384.21 54 425 14.05 (10.76, 18.35)
Past TB treatment history
 Yes 480 (97.17) 12.91 0 14 0
 No 14 (2.83) 385.46 54 426 14.01 (10.73, 18.29)
Baseline clinical staging
 I 215 (43.52) 172.29 19 196 11.03 (7.03, 17.29)
 II 124 (25.10) 108.04 14 110 12.96 (7.67, 21.88)
 III 126 (25.51) 98.75 16 110 16.20 (9.93, 26.45)
 IV 29 (5.87) 19.31 5 24 25.90 (10.78, 62.23)
Baseline CD4 count (cells/μl)
 <100 89 (18.02) 67.45 10 79 14.83 (7.98, 27.56)
 100–199 74 (14.98) 61.99 7 67 11.29 (5.38, 23.69)
 200–349 124 (25.10) 102.79 14 110 13.62 (8.07, 22.99)
 ≥ 350 207 (41.90) 166.15 23 184 13.84 (9.19, 20.83)
Baseline BMI
 < 18.5 137 (27.73) 97.99 17 120 17.35 (10.78, 27.91)
 18.5–24.9 302 (61.13) 254.10 33 269 12.99 (9.23, 18.27)
 >24.9 55 (11.13) 46.27 4 51 8.64 (3.24, 23.03)
Baseline Anemia
 Yes 166 (33.60) 121.69 23 143 18.89 (12.56, 28.44)
 No 328 (66.40) 276.67 31 297 11.21 (7.88, 15.93)
Baseline functional status
 Working 392 (79.35) 329.61 36 356 10.92 (7.88, 15.14)
 Ambulatory 94 (19.03) 64.59 16 78 24.77 (15.17, 40.43)
 Bedridden 8 (1.62) 4.17 2 6 47.96 (11.99, 191.7)
Took CPT at follow up
 Yes 321 (64.98) 274.00 32 289 11.68 (8.26, 16.51))
 No 173 (35.02) 124.37 22 151 17.69 (11.65, 26.87)
Took IPT at follow up
 Yes 195 (39.47) 167.59 13 182 7.76 (4.50, 13.36)
 No 299 (60.53) 230.78 41 258 17.77 (13.08, 24.13)
TB/HIV co-infection
 Yes 43 (8.70) 22.16 7 36 31.59 (15.06, 66.26)
 No 451 (91.30) 376.21 47 404 12.49 (9.39, 16.63)
Initial ART regimen
 TDF/3TC/EFV 467 (94.53) 376.65 50 417 13.27 (10.06, 17.52)
 Others c 27 (5.47) 21.72 4 23 18.41 (6.91, 49.06)
ART Adherence
 Good 350 (70.85) 293.07 35 315 11.94 (8.57, 16.63)
 Fair 40 (8.10) 26.50 8 32 30.19 (15.09, 60.36)
 Poor 104 (21.05) 78.79 11 93 13.95 (7.73, 25.21)

c AZT/3TC/EFV, TDF/3TC/NVP, AZT/3TC/LPV/r, AZT/3TC/ATV/r, TDF/3TC/ATV/r.

3TC: Lamivudine; ABC: Abacavir; ART: Antiretroviral Therapy; AZT: Zidovudine; BMI: Body Mass Index; CD4: Cluster of Differentiation four; CI: Confidence Interval; CPT: Cotrimoxazole Preventive Therapy; EFV: Efavirenz; HIV: Human Immunodeficiency Virus; INH: Isoniazid; IPT: Isoniazid Preventive Therapy; LPV: Lopinavir; NVP: Nevirapine; OI: Opportunistic Infection; PY: Person Year; TDF: Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate; TB: Tuberculosis.

Mortality rate within the first year of ART initiation stratified by baseline and follow-up clinical and immunological characteristics

During the follow-up period more death (21.25 deaths per 100 PY) was observed with patients who started ART six months after HIV confirmation. Under the category of baseline clinical staging, the highest death was observed among those with baseline clinical stage IV (25.9 deaths per 100 PYs). Around 15 deaths per 100 PYs occurred on patients having baseline CD4 cell count less than 100 cells/μl, and also it was 17.35 deaths/100PY on those categorized with baseline BMI of less than 18.5kg/m2. A higher death rate was found in patients who had anemia at baseline (18.89 deaths/100 PY). Similarly, the death rate after ART initiation was high on those patients who had bedridden functional status at baseline (47.96 deaths/100PY). More death rates also recorded among patients who didn’t take CPT and IPT during the follow-up period (17.69 and 17.77 deaths/100PY, respectively). A total of 43 patients had developed tuberculosis within one year follow-up period, of these seven patients had died (31.59 deaths/100 PY). During the follow-up period, eleven deaths (13.95 deaths/100 PY) were recorded with those who had poor ART adherence (Table 2).

Over all Kaplan-Meier survival curve from ART initiation to death

The probability of surviving from ART initiation to death within one-year follow-up period was estimated. So, the survival probability for the total cohort at the end of 3 months was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.97); at the end of 6 months was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.89–0.94); at the end of 9 months was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.86–0.92); and that of the probability of surviving at the end of follow-up was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.84–0.91) (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Over all Kaplan-Meier survival curve from ART initiation to death within one year follow-up period among adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital from Jan 1, 2014 to Dec 31, 2018.

Fig 1

Predictors of mortality within one year of ART initiation

In the bivariable Cox-regression analysis, duration from HIV status confirmation to ART initiation (pre-ART duration), age at enrolment to ART, level of education, residence, employment status, household number, WHO clinical staging, body mass index, functional status, anemia status at baseline, took IPT, took CPT during follow up, and TB co-infection during the follow up were found to be predictors of death within one year of ART initiation at a P-value of less than 0.2. So, these variables were also selected for multivariable Cox-regression analysis. From these, pre-ART duration, residence, functional status at baseline, and took CPT during follow-up were found to be statistically significant predictors of the death rate among adults within the first year of ART initiation at a P-value of less than 0.05. But, variables like presence of opportunistic infections at the moment of diagnosis and CD4 cells/count were not included in the Cox model because the p-value at bi-variable analysis was greater than 0.2 (Table 3).

Table 3. Cox regression analysis of predictors of mortality within one year of ART initiation among adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital; Jan 1, 2014 to Dec 31, 2018 (n = 494).

Characteristics Outcome CHR (p-value) AHR (95% CI) P-value
Died Censored
Patient’s Age in years
 15–24 4 57 1.00 1.00
 25–34 21 179 1.68 (0.340) 1.91(0.64, 5.69) 0.245
 35–44 19 141 1.93 (0.231) 2.11(0.69, 6.41) 0.186
 ≥ 45 10 63 2.16 (0.192) 3.05 (0.89, 10.46) 0.077
Level of education
 No education 17 154 0.71 (0.256) 0.54 (0.29, 1.03) 0.062
 10 education 8 105 0.50 (0.083) 0.46 (0.20, 1.03) 0.058
 20 & above 29 181 1.00 1.00
Patient’s Occupation
 Employed 22 141 1.00 1.00
 Un employed 32 299 0.67 (0.144) 0.69 (0.39, 1.23) 0.212
Patient’s Residence
 Rural 16 90 1.65 (0.094) 1.97 (1.05, 3.71) 0.035*
 Urban 38 350 1.00 1.00
Patient Household number
 ≤ 2 person 26 171 1.00 1.00
 >2 persons 28 269 0.69 (0.178) 0.55 (0.29, 1.01) 0.051
Pre-ART duration
 < 6 months 29 321 1.00 1.00
 ≥ 6 months 25 119 2.07 (0.008) 2.17 (1.24, 3.79) 0.006*
Baseline Anemia
 Yes 23 143 1.66 (0.066) 1.19 (0.60, 2.34) 0.617
 No 31 297 1.00 1.00
Body mass index
 <18.5 kg/m2 17 120 1.29 (0.182) 0.81 (0.42, 1.56) 0.526
 18.5–24.9 kg/m2 33 269 1.00 1.00
 > 24.9 kg/m2 4 51 0.66 (0.440) 0.56 (0.19, 1.64) 0.292
Baseline clinical Staging
 I/II 33 306 1.00 1.00
 III 16 110 1.36 (0.308) 1.02 (0.49, 2.09) 0.953
 IV 5 24 2.09 (0.124) 1.31 (0.43, 4.02) 0.634
Baseline functional status
 Working 36 356 1.00 1.00
Ambulatory/bedridden 18 84 2.31 (0.004) 2.18 (1.01, 4.74) 0.049*
Took IPT during follow up
 Yes 13 182 1.00 1.00
 No 41 258 2.28 (0.010) 1.87 (0.97, 3.59) 0.060
Took CPT at follow up
 Yes 32 289 1.00 1.00
 No 22 151 1.48 (0.160) 1.88 (1.04, 3.41) 0.038*
TB Co-infection
 Yes 7 36 2.35 (0.036) 1.73 (0.66, 4.55) 0.264
 No 47 404 1.00 1.00

*shows statistically significant variables at p-value <0.05.

AHR: Adjusted Hazard Ratio; ART: Antiretroviral Therapy; CHR: Crude Hazard Ratio; CI: Confidence Interval; CPT: Cotrimoxazole Preventive Therapy; IPT: Isoniazid Prophylactic Therapy; TB: Tuberculosis

Assumptions of Cox-proportional hazard were also checked for these variables and they didn’t violate the assumption (Figs 25).

Fig 2. Kaplan Meier survival curve from ART initiation to death within one year stratified by residence among adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital from Jan 1, 2014, to Dec 31, 2018.

Fig 2

Fig 5. Kaplan Meier survival curve from ART initiation to death within one year stratified by CPT usage among adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital from Jan 1, 2014, to Dec 31, 2018.

Fig 5

Fig 3. Kaplan Meier survival curve from ART initiation to death within one year stratified by pre-ART duration among adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital from Jan 1, 2014, to Dec 31, 2018.

Fig 3

Fig 4. Kaplan Meier survival curve from ART initiation to death within one year stratified by baseline functional status among adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital from Jan 1, 2014, to Dec 31, 2018.

Fig 4

Discussion

In this study, the overall incidence of mortality within a year of ART initiation and its predictors were identified. Overall, 10.93% (95% CI: 8.72–13.62) of study participants were known to have died within a year of ART initiation. This is in line with studies conducted in Tigray (13.5%) and Somalia (9.8%), Ethiopia [24, 28], and also study in India with 11.9% [29]. This similarity with Tigray and Somalia, Ethiopia, could be that they used similar HIV care and treatment guideline. Likewise, Indians and Ethiopians practice almost similar lifestyles which might contribute to this HIV-related result.

The cumulative incidence of death during the follow-up was 13.56 deaths per 100 PY (95% CI: 10.38–17.69). This is in line with a study conducted from South Africa which showed the mortality rate of 13 deaths per 100 PY [30]. But, the death rate of the current study is higher than similar studies conducted in Uganda, India, and Korea [11, 19, 22]. This higher rate of death in the current study might be due to difference in the study setting, the difference in time of the study, and the lower sample size used in the current study. The lower economical level of the current study setting than Indian and Korean Gross Domestic Product (GDP) also contribute for a higher mortality rate of HIV-infected patients.

In the current study, more death rate was observed within the first three months after ART initiation which was 17.77 deaths per 100 PY (95% CI: 11.59, 27.26). This is congruent with a study from South Africa [30]. This might be that patients within the first three months of ART initiation may face many difficulties like IRIS, adverse effects of HAART, and high susceptibility to OIs which results in early mortality.

In this study, factors that predict early mortality within the first year after ART initiation were identified. After applying multivariable analysis, four variables including patient residence, pre-ART duration, functional status at the baseline and status of CPT usage while on ART were found to be independently significant predictors of mortality within the first year.

This study revealed that patients from rural residence were about two times (AHR = 1.97; 95% CI: 1.05, 3.71) at higher risk of death within the first year after ART initiation as compared to patients from urban residence. The possible justification for this finding could be patients from rural residence are more likely to be far from HIV care settings and are prone to missing of appointments for their next schedules. Also these patients are less aware about side effects of ART drugs that they took for treatment; so that they may discontinue the treatment. By these and other factors patients from rural residence tends to be less adhere to ART drugs [3133] and this non-adherence can contribute to early mortality of HIV infected patients.

Similarly, HIV infected patients who started ART six months and above after HIV status confirmation were 2.17 times (AHR = 2.17; 95% CI: 1.24, 3.79) at higher risk of death within the first year than patients who started ART early. This is supported by similar study conducted in Uganda at 2012 [11]. This might be due to the fact that as the pre-ART duration became more prolonged, the disease progresses most probably to the advanced HIV disease status. This HIV disease advancement in turn results in an increased risk of death even after starting ART [34].

Patients with baseline ambulatory or bedridden functional status were about two fold at higher risk of death within the first year of HAART as compared to patients with working functional status at enrolment to ART (AHR = 2.18; 95% CI: 1.01, 4.74). This finding is agreed with other studies conducted in different parts of Ethiopia at different time periods, India, and China [20, 28, 29, 3539]. This is due to the fact that ambulatory or bedridden functional status is an indicator of low immune status. When the immune status of HIV infected patients became low, they tend to coerced for inability to cope with the disease and high risk of death due to OIs [40].

WHO guidelines on Cotrimoxazole prophylaxis in resource-limited settings recommended the use of this prophylaxis as an integral component of HIV care to prevent OIs and related mortality [4]. But, different studies stated that, still many patients were dying as a result of not taking CPT. In the current study, patients who didn’t take CPT during the follow up were 1.88 times at higher risk of death as compared to those who took CPT (AHR = 1.88; 95% CI: 1.04–3.41). This is supported by other studies conducted in Debre-Markos and Harar, Ethiopia [14, 23]. This higher risk of death among CPT non-users might be due to the fact that, as HIV infected patients didn’t use CPT they are less benefited from the implication of Cotrimoxazole prophylaxis. CPT significantly reduces the occurrence of opportunistic infections which can be a risk factors for early mortality among patients on HAART [4].

Conclusion

Mortality rate of HIV patients in the first year of ART initiation is still high in the study area.

Rural residence, longer pre-ART duration, not took CPT, and ambulatory/bedridden functional status at enrolment were found to be independent predictors of mortality within the first year of ART initiation. Hence, giving special attention for patients from rural area and provision of CPT are crucial to reduce mortality. If possible, initiation of ART sooner after status confirmed is crucial especially for those patients who are more at risk of developing low immunity.

Limitation

Because of its retrospective nature of the study few important variables like smoking, chat chewing, and alcohol drinking were not included because these variables were not recorded on the chart. Additionally, HIV-RNA related data was not incorporated due to lack of this test for majority of patients.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Bi-variable Cox regression analysis of predictors of mortality within one year of ART initiation among adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital; Jan 1, 2014 to Dec 31, 2018 (n = 494).

(DOCX)

S1 Dataset. Anonymized dataset.

(XLS)

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the hospital director and data collectors for their collaboration during the data collection. Also, authors’ heartfelt thank was goes to University of Gondar for providing ethical clearance.

Abbreviations

3TC

Lamivudine

AHR

Adjusted Hazard Ratio

AIDS

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome

ART

Antiretroviral Therapy

BMI

Body Mass Index

CD4

Cluster of Differentiation Four

CHR

Crude Hazard Ratio

CPT

Cotrimoxazole Prophylactic Therapy

EFV

Efavirinz

HAART

Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy

HIV

Human Immunodeficiency Virus

IPT

Isoniazid Preventive Therapy

IQR

Inter Quartile Range

IRIS

Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome

OIs

Opportunistic Infections

PY

Peron Year

TDF

Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate

WHO

World Health Organization

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files. Similarly, the minimally Anonymized dataset has been uploaded as a Supporting information file.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Roser, M. and H. Ritchie, HIV / AIDS. Our World in Data, 2018.
  • 2.HIV/AIDS; J.U.N.P.o. Fact sheet—Latest global and regional statistics on the status of the AIDS epidemic. 2020 06 July 2020 [cited 2020 8]; https://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/UNAIDS_FactSheet_en.pdf.
  • 3.Silverman R.A., et al., Predictors of mortality within the first year of initiating antiretroviral therapy in urban and rural Kenya: A prospective cohort study. PloS one, 2019. 14(10): p. e0223411. 10.1371/journal.pone.0223411 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Organization W.H., Consolidated guidelines on the use of antiretroviral drugs for treating and preventing HIV infection: recommendations for a public health approach. 2016: World Health Organization. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Yiannoutsos C.T., et al., Estimated mortality of adult HIV-infected patients starting treatment with combination antiretroviral therapy. Sexually transmitted infections, 2012. 88(Suppl 2): p. i33–i43. 10.1136/sextrans-2012-050658 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Calabrese S.K. and Mayer K.H., Providers should discuss U = U with all patients living with HIV. The Lancet HIV, 2019. 6(4): p. e211–e213. 10.1016/S2352-3018(19)30030-X [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Borghetti A., et al., Efficacy and tolerability of dolutegravir and two nucleos (t) ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors in HIV-1-positive, virologically suppressed patients. Aids, 2017. 31(3): p. 457–459. 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001357 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Rossetti B., et al., Efficacy and safety of dolutegravir-based regimens in advanced HIV-infected naive patients: results from a multicenter cohort study. Antiviral research, 2019. 169: p. 104552. 10.1016/j.antiviral.2019.104552 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Geng E.H., et al., Estimation of mortality among HIV-infected people on antiretroviral treatment in east Africa: a sampling based approach in an observational, multisite, cohort study. The lancet HIV, 2015. 2(3): p. e107–e116. 10.1016/S2352-3018(15)00002-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.O’Brien D., et al., Risk factors for mortality during antiretroviral therapy in older populations in resource‐limited settings. Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2016. 19(1): p. 20665. 10.7448/IAS.19.1.20665 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Hermans S., et al., Earlier initiation of antiretroviral therapy, increased tuberculosis case finding and reduced mortality in a setting of improved HIV care: a retrospective cohort study. HIV medicine, 2012. 13(6): p. 337–344. 10.1111/j.1468-1293.2011.00980.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Gupta S. and Granich R., When will sub-Saharan Africa adopt HIV treatment for all? Southern African journal of HIV medicine, 2016. 17(1): p. 1–6. 10.4102/sajhivmed.v17i1.459 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Gupta A., et al., Early mortality in adults initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) in low-and middle-income countries (LMIC): a systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one, 2011. 6(12): p. e28691. 10.1371/journal.pone.0028691 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Digaffe T., Seyoum B., and Oljirra L., Survival and Predictors of Mortality among Adults on Antiretroviral Therapy in Selected Public Hospitals in Harar, Eastern Ethiopia. J Trop Dis, 2014. 2(148): p. 2. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Antinori A., et al., Late presentation of HIV infection: a consensus definition. HIV medicine, 2011. 12(1): p. 61–64. 10.1111/j.1468-1293.2010.00857.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Croxford S., et al., Mortality and causes of death in people diagnosed with HIV in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy compared with the general population: an analysis of a national observational cohort. The Lancet Public Health, 2017. 2(1): p. e35–e46. 10.1016/S2468-2667(16)30020-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Lee J.-H., et al., Increasing late diagnosis in HIV infection in South Korea: 2000–2007. BMC Public Health, 2010. 10(1): p. 1–7. 10.1186/1471-2458-10-411 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Hall H.I., Tang T., and Espinoza L., Late diagnosis of HIV infection in metropolitan areas of the United States and Puerto Rico. AIDS and Behavior, 2016. 20(5): p. 967–972. 10.1007/s10461-015-1241-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Bhowmik A., et al., Predictors of mortality among HIV–infected patients initiating anti retroviral therapy at a tertiary care hospital in Eastern India. Asian Pacific journal of tropical medicine, 2012. 5(12): p. 986–990. 10.1016/S1995-7645(12)60187-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Biset Ayalew M., Mortality and its predictors among HIV infected patients taking antiretroviral treatment in Ethiopia: a systematic review. AIDS research and treatment, 2017. 2017. 10.1155/2017/5415298 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Harar E. and Jigjiga E., Predictors of mortality among adult patients enrolled on Antiretroviral Therapy in Hiwotfana specialized University Hospital, Eastern Ethiopia: Retrospective Cohort study. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Lee S.H., et al., Causes of death and risk factors for mortality among HIV-infected patients receiving antiretroviral therapy in Korea. Journal of Korean medical science, 2013. 28(7): p. 990–997. 10.3346/jkms.2013.28.7.990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Tadele A., Shumey A., and Hiruy N., Survival and predictors of mortality among adult patients on highly active antiretroviral therapy at Debre-markos referral hospital, North West Ethiopia; a retrospective cohort study. Journal of AIDS & Clinical Research, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Misgina K.H., et al., Predictors of mortality among adult people living with HIV/AIDS on antiretroviral therapy at Suhul Hospital, Tigrai, Northern Ethiopia: a retrospective follow-up study. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 2019. 38(1): p. 37. 10.1186/s41043-019-0194-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Aemro A., Jember A., and Anlay D.Z., Incidence and predictors of tuberculosis occurrence among adults on antiretroviral therapy at Debre Markos referral hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: retrospective follow-up study. BMC Infectious Diseases, 2020. 20(1): p. 1–11. 10.1186/s12879-020-04959-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Geneva, S. and W.H. Organization, Haemoglobin Concentrations for the Diagnosis of Anaemia and Assessment of Severity. Vitamin and Mineral Nutrition Information System. Document Reference WHO. 2011, NMH/NHD/MNM/11.1. http://www.who.int/entity/vmnis/indicators/haemoglobin ….
  • 27.Health, F.M.O., National guidelines for comprehensive HIV prevention, care and treatment. Feb 2017.
  • 28.Damtew B., Mengistie B., and Alemayehu T., Survival and determinants of mortality in adult HIV/Aids patients initiating antiretroviral therapy in Somali Region, Eastern Ethiopia. Pan African Medical Journal, 2015. 22(1). 10.11604/pamj.2015.22.138.4352 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Bajpai R.C., et al., Estimation of life-time survival and predictors of mortality among the people living with HIV/AIDS: a case study in Andhra Pradesh, India. Int J Community Med Public Health, 2016. 3(4): p. 845–51. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Russell E.C., et al., Low haemoglobin predicts early mortality among adults starting antiretroviral therapy in an HIV care programme in South Africa: a cohort study. BMC Public Health, 2010. 10(1): p. 433. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Hailasillassie K., et al., Factors associated with adherence of highly active antiretroviral therapy among adult HIV/AIDS patients in Mekelle Hospital Northern Ethiopia. Science Journal of Public Health, 2014. 2(4): p. 367–372. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Molla A.A., et al., Adherence to antiretroviral therapy and associated factors among HIV positive adults attending care and treatment in University of Gondar Referral Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia. BMC infectious diseases, 2018. 18(1): p. 266. 10.1186/s12879-018-3176-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Ohl M., et al., Rural residence and adoption of a novel HIV therapy in a national, equal-access healthcare system. AIDS and Behavior, 2013. 17(1): p. 250–259. 10.1007/s10461-011-0107-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Organization, W.H., Guidelines for managing advanced HIV disease and rapid initiation of antiretroviral therapy, July 2017. 2017. [PubMed]
  • 35.Gesesew H.A., et al., Early mortality among children and adults in antiretroviral therapy programs in Southwest Ethiopia, 2003–15. PloS one, 2018. 13(6): p. e0198815. 10.1371/journal.pone.0198815 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Joseph N., et al., Prognostic factors of mortality among adult patients on antiretroviral therapy in India: A hospital based retrospective cohort study. BioMed research international, 2019. 2019. 10.1155/2019/1419604 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Kebede A., et al., Epidemiology of survival pattern and its predictors among HIV positive patients on highly active antiretroviral therapy in Southern Ethiopia public health facilities: a retrospective cohort study. AIDS Research and Therapy, 2020. 17(1): p. 1–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Setegn T., et al., Predictors of mortality among adult antiretroviral therapy users in southeastern Ethiopia: retrospective cohort study. AIDS research and treatment, 2015. 2015. 10.1155/2015/148769 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Tachbele E. and Ameni G., Survival and predictors of mortality among human immunodeficiency virus patients on anti-retroviral treatment at Jinka Hospital, South Omo, Ethiopia: a six years retrospective cohort study. Epidemiology and health, 2016. 38. 10.4178/epih.e2016049 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Thejus T., Jeeja M., and Jayakrishnan T., The functional status of patients with AIDS attending antiretroviral treatment center. Indian Journal of palliative care, 2009. 15(1): p. 57. 10.4103/0973-1075.53513 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Giordano Madeddu

17 Dec 2020

PONE-D-20-34000

Incidence and predictors of mortality within the first year of antiretroviral therapy initiation at Debre-Markos referral hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: A retrospective follow up study

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Aemro,

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 Jan 31 2021 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: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Giordano Madeddu

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 provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

If you are reporting a retrospective study of medical records or archived samples, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them and/or whether the IRB or ethics committee waived the requirement for informed consent. If patients provided informed written consent to have data from their medical records used in research, please include this information.

3. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service.  

Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services.  If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

  • The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

  • A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

  • A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

4. Please ensure you have thoroughly discussed any potential limitations of this study within the Discussion section, including the potential impact of confounding factors.

5. We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

6. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript.

7. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 4. in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

[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: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

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: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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: The aims of the study are very interesting and appealing. Indeed, the authors esplored the impact of a large number of variables on the clinical outcomes.

In my opinion, the paper could be more clear and easy to read if results are summarized better, avoiding to duplicate results in table and text. They need to report a valid legend for the KM figures and log Rank p results.

Table 4 is outlined.

Reviewer #2: Agazhe Aemr et al. in their study showed the incidence incidence and predictors of mortality in naive people with HIV starting an antiretroviral treatment. Many issues are present.

General comment:

Abbreviations should be written entirely in the first appearance both in abstract and in full text.

Many typo and grammatical mistakes are present in the manuscript. I suggest to include an English mother tongue revisor to check the manuscript.

Introduction

- The authors wrote "But HIV-infected individuals still hesitates to start the treatment early which results in progression of the disease to the advanced stage. This intern results in risk of early mortality for patients with HIV". Probably the hesitation is due to cultural behavior. I suggest specifying that this sentence concern the African or Ethiopian situation.

About the introduction, I suggest adding a part about the efficacy and tolerability of the new drugs also in the advanced HIV-infected naïve patients. I suggest you read these papers that you could also cite in the introduction: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.antiviral.2019.104552, https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8122062, https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S260449, https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0000000000001357

Method

The methods section is quite long. I suggest deleting the geographical part; although it is very interesting, it does not add crucial information.

In the results section, the authors wrote about anemia. I suggest adding the definition of anemia in methods.

Results and discussion

The authors wrote, "but the 179 death rate was high in males which is 16.32 deaths per 100 person year." I suggest also adding the number of female deaths per 100 person-years to make clear the difference.

Also they should define what they intend with good, fair, and poor adherence to antiretroviral treatment.

No data about baseline HIV-RNA load is present. I believe that this information is crucial both for deaths and virological failure. If this information is not available, the authors should discuss it in the limit's section.

The authors wrote, "From these, pre-ART duration, residence, functional status at baseline, and took Cotrimoxazole preventive therapy during follow up were found to be statistically significant predictors of the death rate among adults within the first year of ART initiation at a P-value of less than 0.05 (Table 3)". I think the authors mean "table 4". Please check it.

No data about the cause of death are present. I suggest adding them.

The presence of opportunistic infections at the moment of diagnosis is not present in the Cox model. Which was the CHR of having them?

Also, CD4 cells/count does not been considered in the Cox model. Different studies showed how late-presenters had increased mortality. I believe that the authors should discuss it.

Table 1.

- Please recheck the percentages' approximation. The sum of "age in years", and Educational level" is 100.1% and 99.99% respectively.

- 67% of people had a baseline CD4 cell count > 200 cells-mL and 41.9 more than 350. It is not clear why 65% of people took cotrimoxazole and 39.47% isoniazid. People who start isoniazid (how long did they take it?) had a positive tuberculin test?

Table 2

- It is not clear what the authors mean with "Past OI", "Past CPT treatment", "Past INH prophylaxis", and "Past TB treatment history. Do they mean if patients have done the treatments before HIV diagnosis?

- The authors should include in the table a subtitle to explain all abbreviations used in the table.

Table 3.

- Please remove "(continued)", or rename the table as table 2.

- About the initial ART regimens, the authors choose as variable "le" and "others". Please correct it. Furthermore, I believe that it is interesting knowing what other regimens the patients started. In my opinion, this is important to understand why mortality is higher in "others" group.

- The authors should include in the table a subtitle to explain all abbreviations used in the table.

Table 4

- It should be in the results section and not in the discussion.

- The authors should include in the table a subtitle to explain all abbreviations used in the table.

- In table 2 the authors divided the educational level into "no education", "primary", "secondary", and college +". In this table, instead, they divided it into "no education", "10 education", and "20 & above". I suggest using the same division.

Figure 1

- It is not clear what the number between brackets mean. Please comment.

All figures

- In the text, the authors wrote about mortality using "months of follow-up," while in the figures, time is expressed as a fraction of years. It could create confusion in the readers because "0.6" could be interpreted as "6 months", instead of 7.2 months. I suggest modifyin,g the X-axes of the figures

- I suggest performing a Log-rank test to compare two samples' survival distributions in the different KM to see if there is a statistical difference.

**********

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.

PLoS One. 2021 May 14;16(5):e0251648. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251648.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


27 Jan 2021

Point by point response to reviewers’ comments

Part I: Editors’ concerns and response by the authors:

1. Editors’ concern:

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming

Authors’ response:

The authors tried to ensure that the manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements.

2. Editors’ concern:

Please provide additional details regarding participant consent.

Authors’ response:

This study was based on chart review so that individual consent from each participant is not important, even it is impossible to get individual consent from each participant. There for, the one who is responsible to give the consent for the authors to collect data from the chart was medical director of the hospital. So, the medical director gave to the authors a signed consent and we took it and gave to data clerks so that the data collectors could extract data from the charts. Additionally, all data extracted from patient’s chart were fully anonymized.

3. Editors’ concern:

We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar.

Authors’ response:

With repeated reading and with the help of online grammar checker, the authors tried to correct problems regarding to language usage, spelling, and grammar.

4. Editors’ concern:

Please ensure you have thoroughly discussed any potential limitations of this study within the Discussion section, including the potential impact of confounding factors.

Authors’ response:

Potential limitations of the study were stated in the revised manuscript next to the discussion part. Additionally, confounding factors were reduced by excluding from multi-variable analysis of those variables with p-value of greater than 0.2 at bi-variable analysis.

5. Editors’ concern:

We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly?

Authors’ response:

Thank you for your clarification.

The message that I expressed as “data from this study are available upon request” doesn’t mean there is a restriction of availing the data set. Rather it was to mean that the data will be avail based on your interest or your need.

a. Editors’ concern:

If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail

Authors’ response:

In this data set, there are no ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set; because, there is no potentially identified or sensitive patient information and it is fully anonymized.

b. As per the request, minimal anonymized data set is uploaded.

6. Editors’ concern:

Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript

Authors’ response:

Thanks for your information; the ethics statement is incorporated only in the Methods section of the revised manuscript.

7. Editors’ concern:

We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 4. in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

Authors’ response:

Yes, the author accept it and made a correction on the manuscript. Actually there was no any table which the author didn’t refer in the text of the previous manuscript. There were three tables (table 1, table 2, and table 3), of which table 2 was divided in to two pages with a title “table 2 (continued)” and this might resulted in confusion to both the editors and reviewers. By considering this, the authors tried to merge table 2 and put it in a single page of the revised manuscript.

Part II: Reviewers' comments and response by the authors:

Reviewer #1: The aims of the study are very interesting and appealing. Indeed, the authors explored the impact of a large number of variables on the clinical outcomes. In my opinion, the paper could be more clear and easy to read if results are summarized better, avoiding to duplicate results in table and text. They need to report a valid legend for the KM figures and log Rank p results. Table 4 is outlined.

Authors’ response:

• The authors highlighted main results in the text and tried to summarize in some manner, as per the comment. But, it could be clear that not all findings on the table are incorporated in the text.

• Based on the comment the authors give valid legend for the KM figures.

• Both chi-square and log-rank p-values are incorporated in the revised manuscript.

• The authors re-organize the tables as table 1, 2, and 3 by removing “table 2 continued”. Also, the tables are cited immediately after the text they tend to be referred.

Reviewer #2:

General comment by reviewer#2:

Abbreviations should be written entirely in the first appearance both in abstract and in full text.

Many typo and grammatical mistakes are present in the manuscript. I suggest to include an English mother tongue revisor to check the manuscript.

Authors’ response:

Thank you for your comment and I tried to consider all the comments; Abbreviations had written entirely in the first appearance and attempt was made to correct grammatical mistakes present in the manuscript with repeated reading and using of online grammar checker (https://www.scribens.com/, https://www.grammarcheck.net/editor/).

Introduction:

Reviewer concern:

The authors wrote "But HIV-infected individuals still hesitates to start the treatment early which results in progression of the disease to the advanced stage. This intern results in risk of early mortality for patients with HIV". Probably the hesitation is due to cultural behavior. I suggest specifying that this sentence concern the African or Ethiopian situation.

About the introduction, I suggest adding a part about the efficacy and tolerability of the new drugs also in the advanced HIV-infected naïve patients.

Authors’ response:

• The authors tried to edit the idea regarding the term “hesitation”.

• As per the comment, authors incorporated the effect of Drug discontinuation on the prognosis, on the introduction part.

Method:

Reviewer concern:

The methods section is quite long. I suggest deleting the geographical part; although it is very interesting, it does not add crucial information.

In the results section, the authors wrote about anemia. I suggest adding the definition of anemia in methods.

Authors’ Response:

• Based on the comment, the authors tried to avoid the geographical part in order to shorten the method.

• As per the comment, the authors included the definition of anemia and ART adherence to the method section of the revised manuscript.

Result and discussion:

Reviewer concern: the authors wrote, "But the 179 death rate was high in males which is 16.32 deaths per 100 person year." I suggest also adding the number of female deaths per 100 person-years to make clear the difference

Authors’ Response:

• We would like to say thank you for the comments. You ask the author to add number of ‘female deaths per 100 person-years’ to make clear the difference. Even though it was stated in Table one of the manuscript, the authors incorporated it to the text part of the revised manuscript.

Reviewer concern: Also they should define what they intend with good, fair, and poor adherence to antiretroviral treatment.

Authors’ Response:

• As stated above, the definition of ART drug adherence was incorporated to the method section of the revised manuscript.

Reviewer concern: No data about baseline HIV-RNA load is present. I believe that this information is crucial both for deaths and virological failure. If this information is not available, the authors should discuss it in the limit's section.

Authors’ Response:

• The reviewer also asked the author to include data about baseline HIV-RNA load and it is true that baseline HIV-RNA load is crucial both for deaths and virologic failure.

• But, information related to viral load was not found on the majority of patients’ charts.

• By this reason we were unable to incorporate it to our study; so, based on your suggestion we stated it as a limitation in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer concern: The authors wrote, "From these, pre-ART duration, residence, functional status at baseline, and took Cotrimoxazole preventive therapy during follow up were found to be statistically significant predictors of the death rate among adults within the first year of ART initiation at a P-value of less than 0.05 (Table 3)". I think the authors mean "table 4". Check it?

Authors’ Response:

• Actually it is table 3 not table 4 and the problem is on table 2 that I divided it to two by using the term “Table 2 (continued)”; but, in the revised manuscript table 2 is merged to a single table and the regression table remains as it is (i.e. table 3).

Reviewer concern:

• No data about the cause of death are present. I suggest adding them.

• The presence of opportunistic infections at the moment of diagnosis is not present in the Cox model. Which was the CHR of having them?

• Also, CD4 cells/count does not been considered in the Cox model.

• Different studies showed how late-presenters had increased mortality. I believe that the authors should discuss it.

Authors’ response:

• The reviewer asked the authors to add data about the cause of death. But, it was already included in the previous manuscript entitled as “Predictors of mortality within one year of ART initiation”.

• As the reviewer stated, both the presence of opportunistic infections at the moment of diagnosis and CD4 cells/count are not presented in the Cox model. This is because of CHR of >0.2 in bi-variable analysis for both variables. As stated in the manuscript, the authors include variables to the Cox model only if the p-value at bi-variable analysis is less than 0.2. That is why these two variables are not included in the Cox model.

• The reviewer asked the authors to discuss how late-presenters had increased mortality. But, it is already discussed in the previous manuscript with a variable name of “pre-ART duration (duration from HIV status confirmation to ART initiation)”.

o It is also discussed in the document as: “Similarly, HIV infected patients who started ART six months and above after HIV status confirmation were 2.17 times (AHR=2.17; 95% CI: 1.24, 3.79) at higher risk of death within the first year than patients who started ART early.”

Table 1:

Reviewer concern: Please recheck the percentages' approximation. The sum of "age in years", and Educational level" is 100.1% and 99.99% respectively.

Authors’ response:

• Thank you for your detail reviewing of this manuscript. The authors revised and corrected it into the correct percentage approximation and the sum became 100% for each variable.

Reviewer concern: 67% of people had a baseline CD4 cell count > 200 cells-mL and 41.9 more than 350. It is not clear why 65% of people took cotrimoxazole and 39.47% isoniazid. People who start isoniazid (how long did they take it?) had a positive tuberculin test?

Authors’ response:

This is because some patients with confirmed HIV status are hesitated to start ART as early as they know their status. So in order to avoid the occurrence of OIs including TB, CPT was given for HIV patients whatever their CD4 count. Similarly, isoniazid also provided to them after Tb is ruled out.

Table 2:

Reviewer concern: It is not clear what the authors mean with "Past OI", "Past CPT treatment", "Past INH prophylaxis", and "Past TB treatment history. Do they mean if patients have done the treatments before HIV diagnosis? The authors should include in the table a subtitle to explain all abbreviations used in the table.

Authors’ response:

• Past OI = it is to mean presence of opportunistic infection/s after HIV diagnosis and before ART start.

• Past CPT treatment = it is to mean that "does a patient took cotrimoxazole preventive therapy (CPT) after HIV diagnosis and before ART start to prevent the occurrence of OIs"

• Past INH prophylaxis = means that "does a patient took Isoniazid (INH) prophylaxis after HIV diagnosis and before ART start to prevent the occurrence of tuberculosis?" for those who were ruled out from Tuberculosis disease. But, since the study was based on chart review, it was not informative whether TB was ruled out with tuberculin skin test or other tests; rather we simply took the record labeled as “TB status: positive or negative” irrespective of the type of laboratory performed.

• Past TB treatment history = it is to mean that “did a patient took anti tuberculosis treatment before start of ART?”

• In the revised manuscript, a key is included to explain abbreviations in the tables.

Table 3.

Reviewer concern:

• Please remove "(continued)", or rename the table as table 2.

• About the initial ART regimens, the authors choose as variable "le" and "others". Please correct it.

• Furthermore, I believe that it is interesting knowing what other regimens the patients started. In my opinion, this is important to understand why mortality is higher in "others" group.

• The authors should include in the table a subtitle to explain all abbreviations used in the table.

Authors’ response:

• The authors tried to merge the table to one table and removed the term “Continued”.

• In the revised manuscript 1e is edited as TDF-3TC-EFV and the reason that the authors categorize the initial ART regimens as "le" and "others" is that more than 94% of patients’ records showed that patients had took TDF-3TC-EFV and only 27 patients (5%) took other than TDF-3TC-EFV. Even, this 5% is constituted from the sum of five different combination therapies; namely: AZT + 3TC + EFV, TDF + 3TC + NVP, AZT + 3TC + LPV/r, AZT + 3TC + ATV/r, and TDF + 3TC + ATV/r. When these categories tabulated with the outcome variable, the assumption of chi-square was violated. So, to keep the assumption, the variable was re-categorized by merging these five combinations in to one (i.e. others).

• In the revised manuscript, a key is included to explain abbreviations used in the table and drugs included in “others” category.

Table 4

Reviewer concern:

• It should be in the results section and not in the discussion

• The authors should include in the table a subtitle to explain all abbreviations used in the table.

• In table 2 the authors divided the educational level into "no education", "primary", "secondary", and college +". In this table, instead, they divided it into "no education", "10 education", and "20 & above". I suggest using the same division.

Authors’ response:

• Thank you for the comments; actually it is table 3 not table 4 as I stated it before.

• In the revised manuscript table 3 is sited in the results section, as per the comment.

• Regarding educational level categorization: based on the comment I preferred to use common category in both tables (i.e. "no education", "10 education", and "20 & above") and corrected in the revised manuscript.

Figure 1:

Reviewer concern: It is not clear what the number between brackets mean. Please comment.

Authors’ response:

• The numbers in the brackets in Figure 1 is to show the number of deaths within the specified time interval. For example, number 20 in bracket is to mean that 20 deaths were occurred between time zero and 0.2 years. But, in order to avoid confusion the authors avoid these numbers in brackets at the revised manuscript.

All figures:

Reviewer concern:

• In the text, the authors wrote about mortality using "months of follow-up," while in the figures, time is expressed as a fraction of years.

• It could create confusion in the readers because "0.6" could be interpreted as "6 months", instead of 7.2 months.

• I suggest modifying the X-axes of the figures

• I suggest performing a Log-rank test to compare two samples' survival distributions in the different KM to see if there is a statistical difference.

Authors’ response:

• Thank you for your detailed viewing of the document. Actually, the x-axis of each figure was clearly entitled as “analysis time in year” so that “0.6” can be interpreted as 0.6 year. But to avoid a confusion the x-axis is labeled as “analysis time in month” in the revised manuscript, as per the comment.

• Really, I accept the comment regarding performing a Log-rank test to see if there is a statistical difference between groups. Therefore, log-rank test value is analyzed and incorporated in the revised manuscript for each figure (fig2-5).

Thank you!!

Attachment

Submitted filename: Point by point response.docx

Decision Letter 1

Giordano Madeddu

22 Feb 2021

PONE-D-20-34000R1

Incidence and predictors of mortality within the first year of antiretroviral therapy initiation at Debre-Markos referral hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: A retrospective follow up study

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Aemro,

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 Apr 08 2021 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: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Giordano Madeddu

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. 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: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. 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

**********

5. 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: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. 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: The paper is interesting and well written . Some data are missing but accordino to data sources missing.

Reviewer #2: I have re-read with interest the new version of the manuscript "Incidence and predictors of mortality within the first year of antiretroviral therapy initiation at Debre-Markos referral hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: A retrospective follow-up study". The authors provided to fix most of the issues present in the previous version. However, some issues still remain.

- Re-reading the manuscript I found many typos (e.g. Efavirinz).

- Abbreviation should be written entirely in the first appearance in the text, even if used in the abstract.

- In the previous revision, I ask the authors to discuss the relationship between late presents and mortality in their cohort. The authors reply, "it is already discussed in the previous manuscript with a variable name of “pre-ART duration (duration from HIV status confirmation to ART initiation)”. However, the duration between HIV confirmation and ART initiation does not concern the "late-presenters status", that it is defined as a CD4 cell count <350cells/mm3, without having opportunistic infections. I suggest the authors read this paper 10.1111/j.1468-1293.2010.00857.x, written by the European Late Presenter Consensus working group.

- In my previous revision, I suggested adding more information about the cause of death in the cohort. The authors replied that ”it was already included in the previous manuscript entitled as “Predictors of mortality within one year of ART initiation”.” In my opinion, these results must also be reported in this manuscript because they are crucial for the reader, and he/she does not have to search and read another paper to understand the cause of death.

- The authors reply satisfactorily about the meaning of past opportunistic infection, past CPT treatment, past INH prophylaxis, past TB treatment history. However, I suggest giving this information not only to me, but also to the reader, adding these explanations in the methods section.

- The authors reply that the presence of opportunistic infections at the moment of diagnosis and CD4 cells/count are not presented in the Cox model. This is because of CHR of >0.2 in bi-variable analysis for both variables. In my opinion, these results are important and need to be discussed because AIDS-presenters normally have an increased risk of death. Furthermore, I suggest adding all this statistical analysis as supplemental material.

- The authors wrote that many of the patients had a hesitation on starting the antiretroviral treatments. Could it be due to a lack of communication between the medical staff and the patients? Do you think that longer counseling could reduce this hesitation? Do you normally talk with the patients about U=U (undetectable = untransmittable)? Calabrese et al., in their paper, published in “the lancet HIV, explain why providers should discuss U=U with the patients https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-3018(19)30030-X. Furthermore, a recent analysis on real-life patients reinforced the validity of this message https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0000000000002825. In my opinion, discussing this aspect in the Ethiopian context would increase the value and the originality of the work.

**********

7. 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.

PLoS One. 2021 May 14;16(5):e0251648. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251648.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


21 Apr 2021

March 20, 2021

PLOS ONE editors

Journal of PLOS ONE

Dear PLOS ONE editors

Subject: Submission of revised manuscript entitled as “Incidence and predictors of mortality within the first year of antiretroviral therapy initiation at Debre-Markos referral hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: A retrospective follow up study”, after second revision.

EMID: 57e8cf222f91fd0f

Thank you for email dated on Feb 22, 2021, enclosing the reviewer’s comments. We have carefully revised the manuscript and incorporated their comments accordingly. Our responses are given in point-by-point response below.

We hope the newly revised version is suitable for publication and look forward to hearing from you in due courses.

Sincerely!

Agazhe Aemro Terefe (Corresponding author)

University of Gondar, College of Medicine and health Sciences, School of Nursing, Department of Medical Nursing.

Point by point response to reviewers’ comments

Part I: Editors’ concerns and response by the authors:

� Dear editors, the authors would like to thank you for your comment and your concern to this manuscript.

� The authors tried to ensure that the manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements.

� The newly revised manuscript contains:

o A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s).

o A marked-up copy of the manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version.

o The new version of the revised manuscript without tracked changes.

� Since it is not applicable, the authors didn’t incorporate the laboratory protocol.

Part II: Reviewers’ concerns and response by the authors:

Reviewer #1:

Thank you for your in-depth and detailed viewing of the manuscript entitled as “Incidence and predictors of mortality within the first year of antiretroviral therapy initiation at Debre-Markos referral hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: A retrospective follow up study”. Your comments inspires the authors to do more in order to have an interesting paper. We hope this manuscript will be considered until publication.

Reviewer #2:

Thank you for your full interest in reading the revised manuscript and for your constructive comments regarding the manuscript. Based on your comments, the authors will tried to fix the remaining issues.

Reviewer concern:

� Re-reading the manuscript I found many typos (e.g. Efavirinz).

� Abbreviation should be written entirely in the first appearance in the text, even if used in the abstract.

Authors’ response:

� Yes, the Authors accept that there are typing errors in the manuscript and we tried to correct and re-type the error in the newly revised manuscript.

� As per the comment, the authors wrote abbreviations entirely in the first appearance.

Reviewer concern:

In the previous revision, I ask the authors to discuss the relationship between late presents and mortality in their cohort. The authors reply, "it is already discussed in the previous manuscript with a variable name of “pre-ART duration (duration from HIV status confirmation to ART initiation)”. However, the duration between HIV confirmation and ART initiation does not concern the "late-presenters status", that it is defined as a CD4 cell count <350cells/mm3, without having opportunistic infections. I suggest the authors read this paper 10.1111/j.1468-1293.2010.00857.x, written by the European Late Presenter Consensus working group.

Authors’ response:

� Sorry for the misunderstanding; in the newly revised manuscript, the authors tried to show the relation between late presentation and mortality among HIV-infected patients. Also, it is clearly stated in the introduction part from line 92 to 98 (page 5).

Reviewer concern:

In my previous revision, I suggested adding more information about the cause of death in the cohort. The authors replied that “it was already included in the previous manuscript entitled as “Predictors of mortality within one year of ART initiation”.” In my opinion, these results must also be reported in this manuscript because they are crucial for the reader, and he/she does not have to search and read another paper to understand the cause of death.

Authors’ response:

� Based on the comment, the authors tried to review different kinds of literatures and identified predictors of early mortality stated by different literatures. The authors incorporated these details in the newly revised manuscript (see line 99 to 105 on page 5).

Reviewer concern:

The authors reply satisfactorily about the meaning of past opportunistic infection, past CPT treatment, past INH prophylaxis, past TB treatment history. However, I suggest giving this information not only to me, but also to the reader, adding these explanations in the methods section.

Authors’ response:

� Based on the comment, the authors incorporated these definitions to the newly revised manuscript at the method section, particularly at the operational definition (see from line 149 to 156 on page 7-8).

Reviewer concern:

The authors reply that the presence of opportunistic infections at the moment of diagnosis and CD4 cells/count are not presented in the Cox model. This is because of CHR of >0.2 in bi-variable analysis for both variables. In my opinion, these results are important and need to be discussed because AIDS-presenters normally have an increased risk of death. Furthermore, I suggest adding all this statistical analysis as supplemental material.

Authors’ response:

� Based on the comment, the authors discussed this issue clearly in the newly revised manuscript (see from line 283 to 285 on page 15).

� Furthermore, the authors uploaded all the bi-variable analysis table as supplemental material.

Reviewer concern:

The authors wrote that many of the patients had a hesitation on starting the antiretroviral treatments. Could it be due to a lack of communication between the medical staff and the patients? Do you think that longer counseling could reduce this hesitation? Do you normally talk with the patients about U=U (undetectable = untransmittable)? Calabrese et al., in their paper, published in “the lancet HIV, explain why providers should discuss U=U with the patients https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-3018(19)30030-X. Furthermore, a recent analysis on real-life patients reinforced the validity of this message https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0000000000002825. In my opinion, discussing this aspect in the Ethiopian context would increase the value and the originality of the work.

Authors’ response:

� Thank you for the link you gave to the authors to read more regarding the issue stated in this part.

� Based on the comment you gave, the authors explained the reason why HIV-infected patients hesitate to start ART as early as possible in Ethiopian context.

� In the revised manuscript, the authors incorporated the implication of counseling and educating patients about U=U (undetectable = un-transmittable). (See from line 59 to 67 on page 3-4).

Thanks too much!

Attachment

Submitted filename: point by point response_2.docx

Decision Letter 2

Giordano Madeddu

30 Apr 2021

Incidence and predictors of mortality within the first year of antiretroviral therapy initiation at Debre-Markos referral hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: A retrospective follow up study

PONE-D-20-34000R2

Dear Dr. Aemro,

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,

Giordano Madeddu

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Giordano Madeddu

6 May 2021

PONE-D-20-34000R2

Incidence and predictors of mortality within the first year of antiretroviral therapy initiation at Debre-Markos referral hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: A retrospective follow up study

Dear Dr. Aemro:

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

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 plosone@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. Giordano Madeddu

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 Table. Bi-variable Cox regression analysis of predictors of mortality within one year of ART initiation among adults on ART at Debre-Markos Referral Hospital; Jan 1, 2014 to Dec 31, 2018 (n = 494).

    (DOCX)

    S1 Dataset. Anonymized dataset.

    (XLS)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Point by point response.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: point by point response_2.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files. Similarly, the minimally Anonymized dataset has been uploaded as a Supporting information file.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES