Establishing shared definitions of virological failure and discontinuation for long-acting injectable cabotegravir and rilpivirine therapy (the CONSENSUS-LAI Study): an international survey and Delphi process
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Definitions of virological failure and treatment discontinuation for long-acting injectable (LAI) cabotegravir and rilpivirine antiretroviral therapy are inconsistent in clinical practice and observational studies, which complicates interpretation and implementation of findings. The CONSENSUS-LAI study aimed to establish consistent definitions of virological failure and treatment discontinuation to enhance evidence transferability and support optimal clinical outcomes. METHODS: The study had two phases. Phase 1 was an international online survey exploring existing definitions of virological and treatment discontinuation, conducted between April 25 and July 1, 2024. Eligible participants were health-care professionals working in infectious disease or sexual health services who had provided care to at least ten people living with HIV in the past 6 months, had prescribed LAI cabotegravir and rilpivirine in clinical trials or clinical practice, and were able to give informed consent. Participants were recruited via social media and mailing lists of medical specialist societies. Phase 2 was a Delphi process, in which a panel of experts, selected to ensure representation from all six WHO regions, scored leading definitions from phase 1 on a 9-point Likert scale. The proposed definitions were scored according to four validity criteria: clarity, usability in the expert's setting, appropriateness across clinical purposes, and applicability across relevant population groups. Revisions were suggested in iterative rounds until consensus was reached. Consensus was predefined as at least 75% of experts agreeing or strongly agreeing (scores 7-9) with the validity criteria. FINDINGS: 386 LAI cabotegravir and rilpivirine prescribers across 28 countries completed the survey, revealing 15 definitions for virological failure on LAI cabotegravir and rilpivirine and nine for treatment discontinuation. 52 experts participated in the Delphi process. Consensus agreement on both definitions was reached after two rounds for all validity criteria. For virological failure, the consensus definition was as follows: (a) viral load 200 copies or more per mL or more on two occasions 2-4 weeks apart, or (b) a single viral load of more than 1000 copies per mL, and/or (c) emergent resistance, in the context of timely injections and prior suppression of less than 200 copies per mL, OR (d) unable to suppress viral load to less than 200 copies per mL on continuous therapy. For treatment discontinuation the consensus definition was as follows: people on LAI cabotegravir and rilpivirine who have missed two consecutive injections and have not taken oral bridging in the interim, irrespective of reason for discontinuation. INTERPRETATION: The consensus definitions provide a foundation for aligning practice and evaluating patient outcomes. Further validation of the viral load threshold for virological failure and the optimal viral load retesting window is required. FUNDING: ViiV Healthcare.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».