Clinical outcomes of first antiretroviral regimen in HIV/hepatitis C virus co‐infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".