The effect of antiretroviral treatment of different durations in primary HIV infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare immunological, virological and clinical outcomes in persons initiating combination antiretroviral therapy (cART of different durations within 6 months of seroconversion (early treated) with those who deferred therapy (deferred group). DESIGN: CD4 cell and HIV-RNA measurements for 'early treated' individuals following treatment cessation were compared with the corresponding ART-free period for the 'deferred' group using piecewise linear mixed models. Individuals identified during primary HIV infection were included if they seroconverted from 1st January 1996 and were at least 15 years of age at seroconversion. Those with at least 2 CD4 less than 350 cells/microl or AIDS within the first 6 months following seroconversion were excluded. RESULTS: Of 348 'early treated' patients, 147 stopped cART following treatment for at least 6 (n = 38), more than 6-12 (n = 40) or more than 12 months (n = 69). CD4 cell loss was steeper for the first 6 months following cART cessation, but subsequent loss rate was similar to the 'deferred' group (n = 675, P = 0.26). Although those treated for more than 12 months appeared to maintain higher CD4 cell counts following cART cessation, those treated for 12 months or less had CD4 cell counts 6 months after cessation comparable to those in the 'deferred' group. There was no difference in HIV-RNA set points between the 'early' and 'deferred' groups (P = 0.57). AIDS rates were similar but death rates, mainly due to non-AIDS causes, were higher in the 'deferred' group (P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Transient cART, initiated within 6 months of seroconversion, seems to have no effect on viral load set point and limited beneficial effect on CD4 cell levels in individuals treated for more than 12 months. Its long-term effects remain inconclusive and need further investigation.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".