Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Changes in Antiretroviral Regimens for HIV-infected Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Antiretroviral therapy is now available for HIV-infected patients, and so-called highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) now makes it possible to strongly suppress viral proliferation and restore immunity. However, the development of new drugs and regimens for HAART is still in progress, with the aim of overcoming a number of associated problems. For this purpose, changes in the prescribed anti-HIV drugs are often made. In the present study, we attempted to clarify the actual effects of such treatment modifications in patients who had been started on HAART. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated HIV-infected patients who had been started on HAART at Kitasato University Hospital between April 1997 and March 2013. The patients' backgrounds, characteristics and laboratory data were established from the hospital medical records. RESULTS: The total follow-up time was 447.3 person-years. The patients remained on their initial regimen for a median period of 2040 days, and 39 patients took a second regimen for a median of 2714 days. There was no treatment failure due to regimen change. The reason for the regimen change was adverse effects in 49 cases, poor adherence/virological failure in 4, immunological failure in 3, patient request in 2, and proposals made by health care workers, or for simplification, in 11. The number of patients who required regimen change due to renal dysfunction showed a gradual increase. The number of times anti-HIV drugs were taken per day was not altered when the regimen changed, being mainly once or twice a day. CONCLUSION: In the present study, there were no instances of treatment failure due to regimen change. Through appropriate regimen change, it is possible to avoid serious adverse effects, and to improve patient adherence. Further adverse effects associated with long-term antiretroviral therapy, and reduction of adherence through medication fatigue should be considered. Drug selection and regimen change should be considered in relation to long-term prognosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".