Liver Fibrosis in HIV Patients Receiving a Modern cART: Which Factors Play a Role?

Liver-related death in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals is about 10 times higher compared with the general population, and the prevalence of significant liver fibrosis in those with HIV approaches 15%. The present study aimed to assess risk factors for development of hepatic fibrosis in HIV patients receiving a modern combination anti-retroviral therapy (cART).This cross-sectional prospective study included 432 HIV patients, of which 68 (16%) patients were anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) positive and 23 (5%) were HBsAg positive.Health trajectory including clinical characteristics and liver fibrosis stage assessed by transient elastography were collected at inclusion. Liver stiffness values >7.1 kPa were considered as significant fibrosis, while values >12.5 kPa were defined as severe fibrosis. Logistic regression and Cox regression uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to identify independent factors associated with liver fibrosis.Significant liver fibrosis was detected in 10% of HIV mono-infected, in 37% of HCV co-infected patients, and in 18% of hepatitis B virus co-infected patients. The presence of diabetes mellitus (odds ratio [OR] = 4.6) and FIB4 score (OR = 2.4) were independently associated with presence of significant fibrosis in the whole cohort. Similarly, diabetes mellitus (OR = 5.4), adiposity (OR = 4.6), and the FIB4 score (OR = 3.3) were independently associated with significant fibrosis in HIV mono-infected patients. Importantly, cumulative cART duration protected, whereas persistent HIV viral replication promoted the development of significant liver fibrosis along the duration of HIV infection.Our findings strongly indicate that besides known risk factors like metabolic disorders, HIV may also have a direct effect on fibrogenesis. Successful cART leading to complete suppression of HIV replication might protect from development of liver fibrosis.     

Representation,Exemplification, and Risk: Resonance of Tobacco Graphic Health Warnings Across Diverse Populations

As countries implement Article 11 of the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, graphic warning labels that use images of people and their body parts to illustrate the consequences of smoking are being added to cigarette packs. According to exemplification theory, these case examples—exemplars—can shape perceptions about risk and may resonate differently among demographic subpopulations. Drawing on data from eight focus groups (N = 63) with smokers and nonsmokers from vulnerable populations, this qualitative study explores whether people considered exemplars in their reactions to and evaluations of U.S. graphic health warning labels initially proposed by the Food and Drug Administration. Participants made reference to prior and concurrent mass media messages and exemplars during the focus groups and used demographic cues in making sense of the images on the warning labels. Participants were particularly sensitive to age of the exemplars and how it might affect label effectiveness and beliefs about smoking. Race and socioeconomic status also were salient for some participants. We recommend that exemplars and exemplification be considered when selecting and evaluating graphic health warnings for tobacco labels and associated media campaigns.     

Absence of FGFR3–TACC3 rearrangement in hematological malignancies with numerical chromosomal alteration

FGFR–TACC, found in different tumor types, is characterized by the fusion of a member of fibroblast grown factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase (TK) family to a member of the transforming acidic coiled-coil (TACC) proteins. Because chromosome numerical alterations, hallmarks of FGFR–TACC fusions are present in many hematological disorders and there are no data on the prevalence, we studied a series of patients with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome who presented numerical alterations using cytogenetic traditional analysis. None of the analyzed samples showed FGFR3–TACC3 gene fusion, so screening for this mutation at diagnosis is not recommended.