Potential role of tenofovir vaginal gel for reduction of risk of herpes simplex virus in females
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A surprising result of the groundbreaking CAPRISA-004 trial, which demonstrated the efficacy of vaginal tenofovir 1% gel in reducing the risk of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 infection by 39% in heterosexual women, was the added benefit of this microbicide in reducing acquisition of herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) by 51%. HSV-2 is the most common cause of genital ulcer disease worldwide, and is responsible for considerable morbidity among women and neonates. The virus is further implicated in increasing the risk of both HIV acquisition and transmission, and may have additional adverse consequences in HIV-coinfected persons, making HSV-2 prevention an important clinical and public health objective. While tenofovir had not previously been widely considered to be an anti-herpes drug, in vitro activity against HSV is well documented, raising interest in potential future applications of tenofovir and its prodrugs in HSV-2 control. This article reviews the currently available data for tenofovir as an anti-herpes agent, as well as unanswered questions about delivery systems, drug formulation, rectal administration, drug resistance, and clinical applications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".