<scp>HIV</scp>/hepatitis<scp>C</scp>virus coinfection management: changing guidelines and changing paradigms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to consider the impact of new direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens on hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment in HIV/HCV coinfection. METHODS: Current coinfection guidelines were reviewed and the impact of recent DAA publications evaluating HIV-coinfected individuals was considered. RESULTS: Current coinfection guidelines recommend HIV antiretroviral therapy initiation prior to HCV antiviral therapy. New all-oral, combination antiviral therapy composed of one or more DAAs with or without ribavirin will change this paradigm. As these regimens are better tolerated, it will be possible to offer nearly all HCV-infected patients antiviral therapy, including those with HIV infection. All-oral regimens may impact the incidence of HCV infection by providing a treatment option that can be safely and broadly utilized in high-risk populations with the benefits of curing individual patients and addressing broader public health concerns related to HCV. CONCLUSIONS: HCV infection treatment should no longer be a secondary consideration restricted to the minority of HIV/HCV-coinfected 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 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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".