Computational models that predict response to HIV therapy can reduce virological failure and therapy costs in resource‐limited settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The results of genotypic HIV drug‐resistance testing are, typically, 60–65% predictive of response to combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) and have proven valuable for guiding treatment changes. However, genotyping is not available in many resource‐limited settings (RLS). The purpose of this study was to develop computational models that can predict response to ART without a genotype and evaluate their potential as a treatment support tool in RLS. Random forest models were trained to predict the probability of response to ART (<400 copies HIV RNA/ml) using the following data from 14,891 cases of ART change following virological failure in well‐resourced countries: viral load and CD4 count prior to treatment change, treatment history, drugs in the new regimen, time to follow‐up and follow‐up viral load. The models were assessed during cross‐validation, with an independent set of 800 cases, with 231 cases from RLS in Southern Africa, 206 from India and 375 from Romania. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was the main outcome measure of the accuracy of the model's predictions. The models were used to identify alternative regimens for those cases where the salvage regimen initiated in the clinic failed. Finally, annual therapy costs were used to determine the potential cost effectiveness of this strategy for the Indian cases. The models achieved an AUC of 0.74–0.81 during cross validation and 0.76–0.77 with the 800 test TCEs. They achieved an AUC of 0.59–0.65 with cases from Southern Africa, 0.64 for India and 0.73 for Romania. The models identified alternative, locally available drug regimens that were predicted to result in virological response for 97% of cases where the salvage regimen failed in Southern Africa, 98% of those in Romania and 100% in India. Cost‐neutral or cost‐saving regimens that were predicted to be effective were identified for 88% of the Indian salvage failures with a mean saving of $638 per year. We developed computational models that predict virological response to ART without a genotype with comparable accuracy to genotyping with rules‐based interpretation. The models were able to identify alternative regimens that were predicted to be effective for the great majority of cases where the new regimen prescribed in the clinic failed. The models were also able to identify cost‐saving alternatives for most cases of failure in India. These models are now freely available over the internet as part of the HIV Treatment Response Predictions System (HIV‐TRePS), which has the potential to help optimise antiretroviral therapy in countries with limited resources where genotyping is not generally available.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".