Anabolic steroids for the treatment of weight loss in HIV-infected individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with HIV infection often lose weight during the course of their disease. Furthermore, low serum concentrations of testosterone are common in individuals with HIV infection, particularly those with weight loss. Treatment of weight loss with anabolic steroids in HIV-infected individuals may be beneficial. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to assess the efficacy and safety of anabolic steroids for the treatment of weight loss in adults with HIV infection. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, AIDSLINE, AIDSearch, EMBASE, CINAHL, Current Contents, and the National Library of Medicine Gateway Abstracts for controlled trials up to April 2005. We also searched the bibliographies of the identified studies and review the articles. In addition, pharmaceutical manufacturers of anabolic steroids were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials that compared the use of an anabolic steroid to placebo to treat weight loss in adults with HIV were included. Randomized controlled trials that compared the use of anabolic steroids to placebo for the treatment of weight loss in adults with HIV were selected. Change from baseline in lean body mass or in body weight was reported as on outcome measure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed the trials for quality of randomization, blinding, withdrawals, and adequacy of allocation concealment. For continuous data, weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated. For dichotomous outcomes, risk differences, were calculated. Because of uncertainty as to whether consistent true effects exist in such different populations and treatments, the authors decided a priori to use random effects models for all outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen trials met the inclusion criteria. Two hundred ninety-four individuals randomized to anabolic steroid therapy and 238 individuals randomized to placebo were included in the analysis of efficacy for change from baseline in lean body mass. Three hundred forty-three individuals randomized to anabolic steroid and 286 randomized to placebo were included in the analysis of efficacy for change from baseline in body weight. The mean methodologic quality of the included studies was 4.1, of a maximum 5 points. Although significant heterogeneity was present for both outcomes, the average change in lean body mass was 1.3 kg (95% CI: 0.6, 2.0), while the average change in total body weight was 1.1 kg (95% CI: 0.3, 2.0). A total of eight deaths occurred during the treatment period; four in the anabolic steroid treatment groups and four in the placebo-treatment groups (risk difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.03, 0.03). The risk difference for withdrawals or discontinuations of study medication due to adverse events was 0.00 (95% CI: -0.02, 0.03). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although the results of the trials were heterogeneous, on average, the administration of anabolic steroids appeared to result in a small increase in both lean body mass and body weight as compared with placebo. While these results suggest that anabolic steroids may be useful in the treatment of weight loss in HIV infected individuals, due to limitations, treatment recommendations cannot be made. Further information is required regarding the long-term benefit and adverse effects of anabolic steroid use, the specific populations for which anabolic steroid therapy may be most beneficial, and the optimal regime. In addition, the correlation of improvement in lean body mass with more clinically relevant endpoints, such as physical functioning and survival, needs to be determined.
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 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".