The following question is related to the outcome of "linked transmission"Likely, why are the unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios for early therapy (vs delayed) therapy identical and the resulting unadjusted and adjusted 95% CIs so similar?In the univariate: 0.04 (0.01, 0.26)In the mutivariate: 0.04 (0.01, 0.28)A) even though there is an observational study, treatment was not associated with any of the other predictors in the multiple cox modelB) the relationship between linked transmission and treatment was not modified by baseline cd4 coiners after adjustment for the other predictors in the multiple coxC) as this was a randomized study, the relationship between linked transmission and treatment is unlikely to be confounded by other factors.

Table 3. Hazard Ratios for Prognostic Factors for Partner-Linked and Any HIV-1 Transmission and for Clinical and Composite Events,* Linked Any Clinical Composite Variable Transmission Transmission Events Events hazard ratio (95% CI) Univariate analysis Early therapy vs. delayed therapy 0 04 (0.01-0.26) 0.11 (0.04 0.32) 0.60 (0.41-0.90) 0.28 (0.18 0.45) Baseline CD4 count (per 100 CD4 1 27 (1.02-1 59) 1 25 (1.02-1.52) 0.84 (0.70-1,00) 1.06 (0 91-1.24) Increment) Baseline viral load (per unitlog.. 196 (1 17-3.27) 1.66 (1 08 255) 1.74 (1.32-2.30) 151 (1. 15-1.97) increment) Male sex vs. female sex 0.69 (0.31 1 52) O ES (0.45-1,71) 1 61 (105 2 48) 1.18 (0.78-1.78) Baseline condom use (1006 vs.