Lack of Effectiveness of Antiretroviral Therapy in Preventing HIV Infection in Serodiscordant Couples in Uganda: An Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We examined the real-world effectiveness of ART as an HIV prevention tool among HIV serodiscordant couples in a programmatic setting in a low-income country. METHODS: We enrolled individuals from HIV serodiscordant couples aged ≥18 years of age in Jinja, Uganda from June 2009 - June 2011. In one group of couples the HIV positive partner was receiving ART as they met clinical eligibility criteria (a CD4 cell count ≤250 cells/ μL or WHO Stage III/IV disease). In the second group the infected partner was not yet ART-eligible. We measured HIV incidence by testing the uninfected partner every three months. We conducted genetic linkage studies to determine the source of new infections in seroconverting participants. RESULTS: A total of 586 couples were enrolled of which 249 (42%) of the HIV positive participants were receiving ART at enrollment, and an additional 99 (17%) initiated ART during the study. The median duration of follow-up was 1.5 years. We found 9 new infections among partners of participants who had been receiving ART for at least three months and 8 new infections in partners of participants who had not received ART or received it for less than three months, for incidence rates of 2.09 per 100 person-years (PYRs) and 2.30 per 100 PYRs, respectively. The incidence rate ratio for ART-use was 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.31-2.70; p=0.999). The hazard ratio for HIV seroconversion associated with ART-use by the positive partner was 1.07 (95% CI 0.41-2.80). A total of 5/7 (71%) of the transmissions on ART and 6/7 (86%) of those not on ART were genetically linked. CONCLUSION: Overall HIV incidence was low in comparison to previous studies of serodiscordant couples. However, ART-use was not associated with a reduced risk of HIV transmission in this study.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".