A Randomized, Double‐Blind, Placebo‐Controlled Trial of Combined Nevirapine and Zidovudine Compared with Nevirapine Alone in the Prevention of Perinatal Transmission of HIV in Zimbabwe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A single dose of nevirapine (sdNVP) administered to both mother and infant can decrease mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) by 47%, compared with ultra-short course zidovudine therapy (usZDV). There is limited data about the benefit of usZDV added to sdNVP to prevent mother-to-child transmission. METHODS: We performed a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to determine whether usZDV combined with sdNVP improved neonatal outcome, compared with sdNVP alone. Mothers were randomized to 1 of 2 treatment groups. Mothers in the usZDV/sdNVP group received a loading dose of zidovudine (600 mg administered orally) and continued to receive 300-mg doses of zidovudine orally every 3 h while in labor, and their infants received zidovudine at a dosage of 2 mg per kg of body weight 4 times per day orally for 72 h. Mothers and infants in the sdNVP group received zidovudine placebo dosed in the same manner. All mothers also received nevirapine at a dosage of 200 mg orally while in labor, and all infants received nevirapine 2 mg per kg of body weight orally within 72 h of delivery. RESULTS: The study was stopped on the basis of futility, because interim data showed that, at present trends, superiority would not be demonstrated. Results at 6 weeks of age were available for 609 infants. The primary end point of HIV RNA positivity or death occurred in 21.8% of infants in the usZDV/sdNVP arm and 23.6% of the infants in the sdNVP arm. CONCLUSION: usZDV, when added to a standard 2-dose regimen of sdNVP, did not demonstrate a clinically important decrease in the combined end point of mother-to-child transmission or infant death. High rates of adverse maternal and infant outcome in both study arms suggest that improved approaches are necessary.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".