Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We evaluated and compared four staging classification systems for HIV infection in a population-based cohort: (1) a staging based on prodromal clinical criteria; (2) the Walter Reed Staging Classification (WRSC); (3) the immunologic staging system (ISS), and (4) a simple staging based on oral disease and CD4+ T-cell depletion. The staging systems were applied to 386 HIV-infected men in the San Francisco Men's Health Study cohort who did not have AIDS at the baseline examination. After 48-56 months of follow-up the cumulative incidence of AIDS and the cumulative mortality by stage was determined for each staging. Unlike the other systems, the WRSC could not classify a substantial proportion of HIV-infected men (51.9%). The WRSC and ISS include one or more stages which did not appear to be associated with a prognosis substantially different from that of adjacent stages. The simplified staging system based on CD4+ T-cell depletion and oral disease may be the most effective of the systems studied. A more complete understanding of the pathophysiology during the evolution of HIV infection will be required to define a more detailed staging of this disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Royce et al. (1991) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: