MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1523887359 · doi:10.4137/cmt.s32

Raltegravir: Its use in the Treatment of HIV Infection

2009· article· en· W1523887359 on OpenAlexaff
Marianne Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Medicine Therapeutics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRaltegravirMedicineIntegrase inhibitorContext (archaeology)PharmacologyDrugClinical trialHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)IntegraseAntiretroviral therapyIntensive care medicineVirologyViral loadInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Raltegravir is the first integrase strand transfer inhibitor to be approved for the treatment of HIV infection. Administered orally in doses of 400 mg twice daily, it is well-tolerated and has minimal drug-drug interactions with coadministered antiretrovirals and other agents. In clinical trials including treatment-experienced and treatment-naïve HIV-infected adults, raltegravir in combination with other antiretroviral agents has demonstrated a rapid and potent virologic effect and a generally benign safety profile. Like other antiretrovirals, raltegravir should ideally be given with two additional agents to which the patient's virus is susceptible based on results of resistance testing. In this context, raltegravir offers a safe and effective option as a component of combination therapy in treatment-experienced patients who are infected with HIV-1 strains showing evidence of resistance to other antiretroviral agents. Pending the availability of longer-term efficacy and safety data, raltegravir cannot currently be recommended as part of first-line therapy for treatment-naïve patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.182
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Medicine Therapeutics→Same topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment→French-language works237,207→