Progression to AIDS or Death as Endpoints in HIV Clinical Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess progression to AIDS or death from month 4 after a protease inhibitor-containing regimen is initiated in a cohort of 1,281 patients. METHOD: We used Kaplan-Meier estimates of probability of clinical progression. RESULT: At month 4, most patients had an HIV-1 RNA plasma value below 500 copies/mL (78%) and a CD4 cell count above 300 cells/mm(3) (62%). Starting from month 4, clinical progression at 1 and 2 years of follow-up was low (<3% at 1 year) in patients with HIV RNA <500 copies/mL or 500-10,000 copies/mL and in patients with CD4 between 50 and 300 cells/mm(3) or >300 cells/mm(3). A higher risk of clinical progression (> or =10% at 1 year) was evidenced only in patients with poor response to antiretroviral therapy, that is, with CD4 <50 cells/mm(3) or CD4 between 50-300 cells/mm(3) together with an HIV RNA >10,000 copies/mL. CONCLUSION: In patients currently on antiretroviral therapy, clinical trials with clinical progression as endpoint are almost not feasible, except in patients with a poor immunovirological response to first- or second-line HAART.
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 | 0.134 | 0.146 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".