New antiretroviral drugs: a review of the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and resistance profile of tipranavir, darunavir, etravirine, rilpivirine, maraviroc, and raltegravir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The introduction and approval of new antiretroviral agents in the US and Canada bring new opportunities and new challenges. Arguably, for the first time ever, clinicians have the drugs necessary to achieve the goal of suppressing HIV RNA to levels less than 50 copies/mL in even the most treatment-experienced patients and in those with extensive drug-limiting resistance mutations. However, the use of these new agents is complicated by many drug-drug interactions and--to some extent--pre-existing mutations. To derive maximum durability from the use of these newer drugs, a thorough understanding of their indications and limitations is critical. OBJECTIVE: To thoroughly review the six most recently approved or soon-to-be-approved antiretroviral drugs in the US and Canada: tipranavir, darunavir, etravirine, rilpivirine, maraviroc, and raltegravir. METHODS: Discussion of the indications for, and pharmacokinetics, resistance profile, activity, toxicity, and clinical trials results of, the six new agents. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: These six new agents have resulted in marked progress towards the goal of being able to provide HIV-infected individuals with the drugs necessary to achieve decades of durable suppression of HIV without substantial toxicity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".