Avanti 3: A Randomized, Double-Blind Trial to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Lamivudine plus Zidovudine versus Lamivudine plus Zidovudine plus Nelfinavir in HIV-1-Infected Antiretroviral-Naive Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of our randomized, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was to investigate the safety, tolerability, and antiretroviral and immunological effect of double and triple combination therapy regimens. A total of 105 antiretroviral therapy-naive patients were randomized to receive either zidovudine (300 mg twice per day) plus lamivudine (150 mg twice per day) plus nelfinavir placebo (three times per day) (n=52), or zidovudine/lamivudine (dose as before) plus nelfinavir (750 mg three times per day) (n=53) for 28 weeks. After this time, patients were allowed to switch to open-label zidovudine/lamivudine/nelfinavir. The overall log10 reduction from baseline in plasma HIV-1 RNA was significantly greater in the zidovudine/lamivudine/nelfinavir group than the zidovudine/lamivudine group (P=0.001; median treatment difference, -1.01 log10 copies/ml; 95% confidence interval -1.23 to -0.79), as measured by the average area under the curve minus baseline over 28 weeks. Increases from baseline in CD4 cell counts were statistically significantly greater in the zidovudine/ lamivudine/nelfinavir group (101.5 cells/ml) than the zidovudine/lamivudine group (47.0 cells/ml; P=0.027) at week 28. Of note, the addition of nelfinavir from weeks 28-52 led to an increase in the proportion of subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/ml from 17% (9/52 patients on zidovudine/lamivudine) to 50% (13/26 patients who switched to zidovudine/lamivudine/nelfinavir). Incidence of drug-related adverse events was similar in the two groups, except for nausea (more common in zidovudine/lamivudine group; 40 versus 17%) and diarrhoea (more common in zidovudine/lamivudine/nelfinavir group; 45 versus 14%). In conclusion, our study confirms the efficacy of triple combination therapy with two nucleoside analogues and a protease inhibitor compared with double-nucleoside therapy. Interestingly, the addition of nelfinavir to zidovudine/lamivudine, even after 6 months of double nucleoside therapy, led to a substantial virological benefit that was sustained over 24weeks in a subset of 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".