MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Clinical outcomes of first antiretroviral regimen in HIV/hepatitis C virus co‐infection

2005· article· en· W1973092150 on OpenAlexaff
C. Cooper, Cathy Breau, A.M. Laroche, C Lee, Gary Garber

Bibliographic record

VenueHIV Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersAbbott Laboratories
KeywordsMedicineRegimenRitonavirInternal medicineHepatitis CViral loadHepatitis C virusGastroenterologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Antiretroviral therapyImmunologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Despite the benefits of HAART, initiation of antiretroviral therapy in HIV-HCV co-infected patients is often delayed as a consequence of patient and physician concern pertaining to liver toxicity. It is unclear whether this is justified. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated treatment duration and outcome in 186 patients initiating a first HAART regimen. RESULTS: Despite frequent HIV RNA suppression and CD4 T-cell increase following initiation of HAART, the median duration of therapy was only 8 months. Therapy was discontinued primarily for gastrointestinal intolerance (26%), poor adherence (19%), neurocognitive side effects (13%), and substance abuse (6%). Regimes were changed to reduce pill burden and/or frequency of dosing as well (11%). Only six (4%) subjects interrupted therapy as a result of clinically apparent liver toxicity. None were on low dose ritonavir-containing therapy. In those subjects remaining on HAART for at least 12 months, the median ALT level increased marginally from a baseline of 44 IU/mL to 56 IU/mL. The median AST was 44 IU/mL at baseline and at month 12. CONCLUSIONS: These results support our contention that regimen potency, durability, and extrahepatic side effect profile should remain the paramount considerations related to the selection of HAART regimen in HIV-HCV co-infection.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.350 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHIV MedicineSame topicHepatitis C virus researchFrench-language works237,207