Assessing risk of a short‐term antiretroviral therapy discontinuation as a read‐out of viral control in immune‐based therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although analytical treatment interruption is used as a strategy to test immunotherapeutic agents in HIV-infection, it may pose a risk for study participants. The potential risks of short-term interruption of antiretroviral therapy (ART) during treatment with an autologous dendritic cell immune-based therapy (AGS-004-001) were assessed using data from a subgroup of subjects in the strategies for management of antiretroviral therapy (SMART) study with matched eligibility criteria. A retrospective subgroup analysis of the SMART study population using the eligibility criteria and treatment stopping rules of AGS-004-001 study was analyzed. Key inclusion criteria for AGS-004-001 study were applied to the data collected from participants of the SMART study. There were 440 of 2,720 on the drug conservation arm and 436 of 2,752 on the viral suppression arm that matched the AGS-004-001 inclusion criteria and were used in the SMART subgroup analysis. In the first 16 weeks following randomization into the SMART study there were no deaths in either subgroup. There were two AIDS-related events in the drug conservation subgroup and one in the viral suppression subgroup, making the overall risk of AIDS-related events 2 per 100 person years (0.005%) and 1 per 100 person years (0.002%) in the two subgroups, respectively. There were 6/440 subjects (1.4%) in the drug conservation subgroup and 4/436 subjects (0.92%) in the viral suppression subgroup who experienced Grade 2 adverse events. These results demonstrated that analytical treatment interruption within the context of highly selective, closely monitored studies assessing the antiviral activity of immune-based agents should be an acceptable strategy for at least 16 weeks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".