Micronutrient Deficiency and Treatment Adherence in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Micronutrient Supplementation in ART-Naïve Persons with HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The MAINTAIN study is an on-going RCT comparing high-dose micronutrient and anti-oxidant supplementation versus recommended daily allowance (RDA) vitamins in slowing HIV immune deficiency progression in ART-naïve people with HIV infection. OBJECTIVE: We planned analysis of the first 127 participants to determine the baseline prevalence of serum micronutrient deficiencies and correlates, as well as tolerance and adherence to study interventions. METHODS: Participants receive eight capsules twice daily of 1) high-dose or 2) RDA supplements for two years and are followed-up quarterly for measures of immune deficiency progression, safety and tolerability. Regression analysis was used to identify correlates of micronutrient levels at baseline. Adherence was measured by residual pill count, self-report using the General Treatment Scale (GTS) and short-term recall HIV Adherence Treatment Scale (HATS). RESULTS: Prior micronutrient supplementation (within 30 days) was 27% at screening and 10% of study population, and was not correlated with baseline micronutrient levels. Low levels were frequent for carotene (24%<1 nmol/L), vitamin D (24%<40 nmol/L) and serum folate (20%<15 nmol/L). The proportion with B12 deficiency (<133 pmol/L) was 2.4%. Lower baseline levels of B12 correlated lower baseline CD4 count (r = 0.21, p = 0.02) with a 21 pmol/L reduction in B12 per 100 cells/µL CD4. Vitamin D levels were higher in men (p<0.001). After a median follow-up of 1.63 years, there were 19 (15%) early withdrawals from the study treatment. Mean treatment adherence using pill count was 88%. Subjective adherence by the GTS was 81% and was moderately but significantly correlated with pill count (r = 0.29, p<0.001). Adherence based on short-term recall (HATS) was >80% in 75% of participants. CONCLUSION: Micronutrient levels in asymptomatic HIV+ persons are in keeping with population norms, but micronutrient deficiencies are frequent. Adherence levels are high, and will permit a valid evaluation of treatment effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00798772.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".