Lopinavir/Ritonavir Plus Nevirapine as a Nucleoside-Sparing Approach in Antiretroviral-Experienced Patients (NEKA Study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of a nucleoside-sparing approach with a conventional highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimen in antiretroviral-experienced patients with prolonged viral suppression. METHODS: Pilot study including 31 antiretroviral-experienced patients with HIV RNA <80 copies/mL. Subjects were randomly assigned to lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/rtv) 400/100 mg BID plus nevirapine (NVP) 200 mg BID (NVP group, n = 16) or LPV/rtv plus the 2 previous NRTIs (NRTI group, n = 15). The primary endpoint was the percentage of subjects who maintained viral suppression at week 48. Changes in lipid metabolism, mitochondrial parameters, and LPV trough levels were also assessed. RESULTS: All patients maintained viral suppression after 48 weeks. No subject discontinued therapy because of adverse events. HDL cholesterol increased by 28% at week 24 (P < 0.0001) and 10% after 48 weeks of follow-up (P = 0.319) in the NVP group. In the NRTI group, LDL cholesterol increased by 14% at week 48 (P = 0.076). Mitochondrial DNA/nuclear DNA ratio and mitochondrial respiratory chain complex IV activity showed a trend toward increasing in the NVP group. Mean (SD) LPV trough levels were 6340 (2129) ng/mL in the NRTI group and 5161 (2703) ng/mL in the NVP group (P = 0.140). CONCLUSIONS: In antiretroviral-experienced subjects with sustained viral suppression, dual therapy with NVP plus LPV/rtv at standard dosage was as potent and safe as standard-of-care HAART at 48 weeks of follow-up. This approach may reduce mitochondrial toxicity and improve LPV/rtv-associated lipid abnormalities. The results of this pilot study support the study of this approach in a larger, randomized trial.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".