by
Julie A. Womack;
Terrence E. Murphy;
Harini Bathulapalli;
Kathleen M. Akgun;
Cynthia Gibert;
Ken M. Kunisaki;
David Rimland;
Maria Rodriguez-Barradas;
H. Klar Yaggi;
Amy C. Justice;
Nancy S. Redeker
by
Lesley S. Park;
Janet P. Tate;
Keith Sigel;
David Rimland;
Kristina Crothers;
Cynthia Gibert;
Maria C. Rodriguez-Barradas;
Matthew Bidwell Goetz;
Roger J. Bedimo;
Sheldon T. Brown;
Amy C. Justice;
Robert Dubrow
Objective: Utilizing the Veterans Aging Cohort Study, the largest HIV cohort in North America, we conducted one of the few comprehensive comparisons of cancer incidence time trends in HIV-infected (HIV+) versus uninfected persons during the antiretroviral therapy (ART) era.
Design: Prospective cohort study.
Methods: We followed 44 787 HIV+ and 96 852 demographically matched uninfected persons during 1997–2012. We calculated age-, sex-, and race/ethnicity-standardized incidence rates and incidence rate ratios (IRR, HIV+ versus uninfected) over four calendar periods with incidence rate and IRR period trend P values for cancer groupings and specific cancer types.
Results: We observed 3714 incident cancer diagnoses in HIV+ and 5760 in uninfected persons. The HIV+ all-cancer crude incidence rate increased between 1997–2000 and 2009–2012 (P trend = 0.0019). However, after standardization, we observed highly significant HIV+ incidence rate declines for all cancer (25% decline; P trend <0.0001), AIDS-defining cancers (55% decline; P trend <0.0001), nonAIDS-defining cancers (NADC; 15% decline; P trend = 0.0003), and nonvirus-related NADC (20% decline; P trend <0.0001); significant IRR declines for all cancer (from 2.0 to 1.6; P trend <0.0001), AIDS-defining cancers (from 19 to 5.5; P trend <0.0001), and nonvirus-related NADC (from 1.4 to 1.2; P trend = 0.049); and borderline significant IRR declines for NADC (from 1.6 to 1.4; P trend = 0.078) and virus-related NADC (from 4.9 to 3.5; P trend = 0.071).
Conclusion: Improved HIV care resulting in improved immune function most likely contributed to the HIV+ incidence rate and the IRR declines. Further promotion of early and sustained ART, improved ART regimens, reduction of traditional cancer risk factor (e.g. smoking) prevalence, and evidence-based screening could contribute to future cancer incidence declines among HIV+ persons.
by
Keith Sigel;
Juan Wisnivesky;
Kirsha Gordon;
Robert Dubrow;
Amy Justice;
Sheldon T. Brown;
Joseph Goulet;
Adeel A. Butt;
Stephen Crystal;
David Rimland;
Maria Rodriguez-Barradas;
Cynthia Gibert;
Lesley Park;
Kristina Crothers
Background: It is unclear whether the elevated rate of lung cancer among HIV-infected persons is due to biological effects of HIV, surveillance bias, or excess smoking. We compared the incidence of lung cancer between HIV-infected and demographically similar HIV-uninfected patients, accounting for smoking and stage of lung cancer at diagnosis. Design: Data from the Veterans Aging Cohort Study Virtual Cohort were linked to data from the Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry, resulting in an analytic cohort of 37 294 HIV-infected patients and 75 750 uninfected patients. Methods: We calculated incidence rates of pathologically confirmed lung cancer by dividing numbers of cases by numbers of person-years at risk. We used Poisson regression to determine incidence rate ratios (IRRs), adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, smoking prevalence, previous bacterial pneumonia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Results: The incidence rate of lung cancer in HIV-infected patients was 204 cases per 100 000 person-years [95% confidence interval (CI) 167-249] and among uninfected patients was 119 cases per 100 000 person-years (95% CI 110-129). The IRR of lung cancer associated with HIV infection remained significant after multivariable adjustment (IRR 1.7; 95% CI 1.5-1.9). Lung cancer stage at presentation did not differ between HIV-infected and uninfected patients. Conclusion: In our cohort of demographically similar HIV-infected and uninfected patients, HIV infection was an independent risk factor for lung cancer after controlling for potential confounders including smoking. The similar stage distribution between the two groups indicated that surveillance bias was an unlikely explanation for this finding.