Efavirenz-Induced Skin Eruption and Successful Desensitization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report a patient with efavirenz-induced hypersensitivity syndrome reaction who was successfully desensitized to efavirenz. CASE SUMMARY: A 37-year-old HIV-positive white man was placed on efavirenz, amprenavir, stavudine, lamivudine, and didanosine due to virologic failure with a previous regimen. Eight days into treatment, the patient developed a generalized rash and all medication was discontinued. Two weeks later, he was started on efavirenz, stavudine, didanosine, lamivudine, and lopinavir. The next morning, he awoke with red, itchy skin. All of the medications were discontinued. At the HIV Drug Safety Clinic, the patient was successfully restarted on amprenavir, stavudine, didanosine, lamivudine, and lopinavir. A 14-day desensitization to efavirenz was also undertaken; on day 12 of the desensitization, he once again developed a rash. He was treated symptomatically, and the desensitization protocol was extended. Sixteen months following the successful desensitization, he is tolerating full-dose efavirenz in combination with the other antiretroviral agents. DISCUSSION: The incidence of efavirenz-induced hypersensitivity ranges between 10% and 34%. Generally, an erythematous, maculopapular rash with or without fever develops 1-3 weeks after the initiation of therapy. In many patients without systemic manifestations, an attempt should be made to continue therapy and treat the rash symptomatically. If this fails, desensitization with the implicated drug can be tried. CONCLUSIONS: A history of antiretroviral-induced hypersensitivity reactions often limits the choices of medications that can be used in subsequent treatment regimens. Desensitization may allow for the continued use of previously restricted medications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".