HIV drug resistance detected during low-level viraemia is associated with subsequent virologic failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The clinical implications of emergent HIV drug resistance on samples with low-level viraemia (LLV <1000 copies/ml) remain unclear. We undertook the present analysis to evaluate the impact of emergent HIV drug resistance at LLV on the risk of subsequent virologic failure. METHODS: One thousand, nine hundred and sixty-five patients had genotype results at LLV. Risk of virologic failure (≥1000 copies/ml) after LLV was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression. Resistance was assessed using the Stanford algorithm or virtual phenotypes. Patients were grouped into four susceptibility categories ('GSS' or 'vPSS') during LLV, corresponding to the number of 'active' drugs prescribed: <1; 1-1.5; 2-2.5; and ≥3. RESULTS: A total of 1702 patients with follow-up on constant therapy were eligible for analysis. Participants excluded due to changing therapy or loss to follow-up before their next observation had mostly similar characteristics to included participants. There was a 'dose-dependent' increase in the hazard ratio for virologic failure with susceptibility categories at LLV. Compared with a GSS of at least 3, hazard ratios for virologic failure were 1.4 for GSS 2-2.5; 2.0 for GSS 1-1.5; and 3.0 for GSS less than 1 (P < 0.001). Numerous sensitivity analyses confirmed these findings. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that emergent HIV drug resistance at LLV is strongly associated with subsequent virologic failure. Furthermore, we uncovered a 'dose-dependent' increase in the hazard ratio for virologic failure with decreasing GSS estimated at the time of LLV. On the basis of these findings, we propose that resistance genotyping be encouraged for HIV-infected individuals on antiretroviral therapy experiencing low-level viraemia.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".