<scp>DAUPHINE</scp>: a randomized phase <scp>II</scp> study of danoprevir/ritonavir plus peginterferon alpha‐2a/ribavirin in <scp>HCV</scp> genotypes 1 or 4
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Danoprevir is a hepatitis C virus (HCV) protease inhibitor with activity against genotypes (G)1/G4, which is maintained at lower doses by ritonavir-boosting. We report results of a large, randomized, active-controlled phase IIb study of ritonavir-boosted danoprevir (danoprevir/r) plus peginterferon alpha-2a/ribavirin (P/R) in treatment-naive patients with HCV G1/4 infection. METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with HCV G1/4 infection were randomized to twice-daily danoprevir/r 200/100 mg (A, n = 92); 100/100 mg (B, n = 93); or 50/100 mg (C, n = 94) plus P/R for 24 weeks; twice-daily danoprevir/r 100/100 mg (D, n = 94) plus P/R for 12 or 24 weeks; or P/R alone (E, n = 44) for 48 weeks. Patients in the response-guided therapy arm (D) with an extended rapid virological response (eRVR2: HCV RNA <15 IU/ml during Weeks 2-10) stopped all therapy at Week 12; non-eRVR2 patients continued all treatment to Week 24. The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained the virological response (SVR24: HCV RNA <15 IU/ml after 24 weeks of untreated follow-up). RESULTS: SVR24 rates in Arms A, B, C, D and E were 89.1%, 78.5%, 66.0%, 69.1% and 36.4%, respectively, in the overall population; 83.6%, 69.6%, 60.3%, 59.2% and 38.5% in G1a-infected patients, 96.6%, 93.1%, 73.1%, 78.4% and 28.6% in G1b-infected patients and 100%, 87.5%, 100%, 100% and 66.7% in G4-infected patients. Danoprevir/r plus P/R was generally well tolerated compared with P/R alone. There was a higher incidence of serious adverse events in danoprevir-treatment arms, but most were associated with P/R. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of danoprevir/r plus P/R is efficacious in treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype 1 or 4 infection.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".