MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045020204 · doi:10.1177/2325957414557269

The Use of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Complex Antituberculous and Antiretroviral Drug Dosing in HIV/Tuberculosis-Coinfected Patients

2014· article· en· W2045020204 on OpenAlexaff
Michael G. Newman, Michelle Foisy, Rabia Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (JIAPAC) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsRoyal Alexandra HospitalUniversity of Alberta
FundersViiV Healthcare
KeywordsDrugDosingTuberculosisMedicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Antiretroviral drugTherapeutic drug monitoringPharmacologyVirologyIntensive care medicineAntiretroviral therapyPathologyViral load

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: We report 2 cases coinfected with HIV and tuberculosis (HIV/TB), requiring drug dose adjustments guided by therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) and/or serum drug concentrations. CASE 1: Over the course of the 9-months of TB treatment, drugs that required increased doses due to low concentrations included efavirenz (800 mg), rifampin (900 mg), and isoniazid (450 mg). Higher drug doses were well tolerated until the end of treatment. CASE 2: Over the 12-month course of TB therapy, drugs that required increased doses due to incomplete and/or delayed absorption were rifampin (1500 mg), moxifloxacin (800 mg), and ethambutol (1600 mg). Higher drug doses were well tolerated until the end of treatment. Due to delayed/incomplete drug absorption and weight gain during therapy, higher antituberculous doses may be required in patients coinfected with HIV/TB. A daily dose of efavirenz 800 mg was well tolerated in both patients (weight over 70 kg). Managing patients coinfected with HIV/TB is complex, and, therefore, TDM of drug concentrations can help guide clinical decision making.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (JIAPAC)Same topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatmentFrench-language works237,207