Computational models can predict response to HIV therapy without a genotype and may reduce treatment failure in different resource-limited settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Genotypic HIV drug-resistance testing is typically 60%-65% predictive of response to combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) and is valuable for guiding treatment changes. Genotyping is unavailable in many resource-limited settings (RLSs). We aimed to develop models that can predict response to ART without a genotype and evaluated their potential as a treatment support tool in RLSs. METHODS: Random forest models were trained to predict the probability of response to ART (≤400 copies HIV RNA/mL) using the following data from 14 891 treatment change episodes (TCEs) after virological failure, from well-resourced countries: viral load and CD4 count prior to treatment change, treatment history, drugs in the new regimen, time to follow-up and follow-up viral load. Models were assessed by cross-validation during development, with an independent set of 800 cases from well-resourced countries, plus 231 cases from Southern Africa, 206 from India and 375 from Romania. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was the main outcome measure. RESULTS: The models achieved an AUC of 0.74-0.81 during cross-validation and 0.76-0.77 with the 800 test TCEs. They achieved AUCs of 0.58-0.65 (Southern Africa), 0.63 (India) and 0.70 (Romania). Models were more accurate for data from the well-resourced countries than for cases from Southern Africa and India (P < 0.001), but not Romania. The models identified alternative, available drug regimens predicted to result in virological response for 94% of virological failures in Southern Africa, 99% of those in India and 93% of those in Romania. CONCLUSIONS: We developed computational models that predict virological response to ART without a genotype with comparable accuracy to genotyping with rule-based interpretation. These models have the potential to help optimize antiretroviral therapy for patients in RLSs where genotyping is not generally available.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".