Potential for New Antiretrovirals to Address Unmet Needs in the Management of HIV-1 Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the myriad advances in antiretroviral therapy since the original highly active antiretroviral therapy regimens were developed, there remain numerous important and pressing unmet needs that, if addressed, would substantially improve the quality of life and longevity of HIV-infected patients. The most achievable goals of antiretroviral (ARV) therapy in the near future are likely to be continued reduction in HIV-related morbidity and mortality; improved quality of life; and restoration and preservation of immune function: all of which are most effectively achieved through sustained suppression of HIV-1 RNA. The ability to achieve long-term viral load reduction will require new ARVs with few, manageable toxicities, and medications that are convenient to adhere to, with few drug interactions. This is particularly true for the large number of highly treatment-experienced patients in whom HIV has developed resistance to one or more ARVs. Development of therapies that allow convenient dosing schedules, that do not necessitate strict adherence to meal-related timing restrictions, and that remain active in the face of resistance mutations is paramount, and remains a significant unmet need. Of the large number of ARVs currently in development, this article focuses on three agents recently approved that have shown particular promise in addressing some of these unmet needs: the novel non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor etravirine; the CCR5 antagonist maraviroc; and the integrase inhibitor raltegravir.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".