MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118756687 · doi:10.1155/2013/579741

Potential Impact of a Free Online HIV Treatment Response Prediction System for Reducing Virological Failures and Drug Costs after Antiretroviral Therapy Failure in a Resource-Limited Setting

2013· article· en· W2118756687 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Revell, Gerardo Alvarez‐Uria, Dechao Wang, Anton Pozniak, Julio Montaner, H. Clifford Lane, Brendan Larder

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMed Research International · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsAIDS Vancouver
FundersCore Research for Evolutional Science and TechnologyNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthUniversità degli Studi di BresciaU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineAntiretroviral therapyDrugHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Viral loadCost–benefit analysisRisk analysis (engineering)PharmacologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Antiretroviral drug selection in resource-limited settings is often dictated by strict protocols as part of a public health strategy. The objective of this retrospective study was to examine if the HIV-TRePS online treatment prediction tool could help reduce treatment failure and drug costs in such settings. METHODS: The HIV-TRePS computational models were used to predict the probability of response to therapy for 206 cases of treatment change following failure in India. The models were used to identify alternative locally available 3-drug regimens, which were predicted to be effective. The costs of these regimens were compared to those actually used in the clinic. RESULTS: The models predicted the responses to treatment of the cases with an accuracy of 0.64. The models identified alternative drug regimens that were predicted to result in improved virological response and lower costs than those used in the clinic in 85% of the cases. The average annual cost saving was $364 USD per year (41%). CONCLUSIONS: Computational models that do not require a genotype can predict and potentially avoid treatment failure and may reduce therapy costs. The use of such a system to guide therapeutic decision-making could confer health economic benefits in resource-limited settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.537

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioMed Research InternationalSame topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatmentFrench-language works237,207