Continuing or adding IL-2 in patients treated with antiretroviral therapy (ACTG Protocol A5051, a rollover trial of ACTG Protocol A328)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Effective antiretroviral therapy reduces HIV-1 RNA levels, improves CD4 T-cell counts, and lowers the risk of opportunistic infections and malignancies. Interleukin-2 (IL-2) has been shown to increase CD4 T-cell numbers mainly by expanding CD4 cells and by prolonging their half-lives. HIV-infected patients previously enrolled into A328 had been randomized to antiretroviral therapy (ART) alone or ART followed by IL-2. In A5051, 53 patients from A328 who had previously received IL-2 were allowed to continue IL-2 for an additional 80 weeks; 27 patients who had received ART alone received IL-2 for 80 weeks. RESULTS: The patients previously receiving IL-2 continued to have elevated CD4 levels with extended use of IL-2. The prior ART-alone recipients had increases in CD4 levels to comparable levels as the prior IL-2 recipients (median 804 versus 847 cells/mm3 at week 72; 60% versus 9% had >50% increase in A5051 to week 72, p < 0.001). Those who had previously received IL-2 required fewer IL-2 cycles to maintain their CD4 T-cell counts compared to those newly initiating IL-2. The treatments were well tolerated with no significant differences in toxicity or discontinuations between those newly versus previously receiving IL-2. There were few clinical events observed. CONCLUSIONS: Although sustained CD4 T-cell count increases were seen with IL-2 administration as in other studies, the absence of clinical benefit in two recent randomized trials has demonstrated no apparent role for IL-2 as a therapy in HIV disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: A5051 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000923.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 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".