MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135417699 · doi:10.1086/650002

Long‐Term Efficacy and Safety of Raltegravir Combined with Optimized Background Therapy in Treatment‐Experienced Patients with Drug‐Resistant HIV Infection: Week 96 Results of the BENCHMRK 1 and 2 Phase III Trials

2010· article· en· W2135417699 on OpenAlexaff
Roy T. Steigbigel, David A. Cooper, Hedy Teppler, Joseph J. Eron, José M. Gatell, Princy Kumar, Jürgen K. Rockstroh, Mauro Schechter, Christine Katlama, Martin Markowitz, Patrick Yéni, Mona Loutfy, Adriano Lazzarin, Jeffrey L. Lennox, Bonaventura Clotet, Jing Zhao, Hong Wan, Rand R. Rhodes, Kim M. Strohmaier, Richard J. O. Barnard, Robin Isaacs, Bach‐Yen Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsRaltegravirMedicineAntiretroviral therapyInternal medicineIntegrase inhibitorPharmacotherapyDrugHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)PharmacologyViral loadVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BENCHMRK-1 and -2 are ongoing double-blind phase III studies of raltegravir in patients experiencing failure of antiretroviral therapy with triple-class drug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus infection. At week 96 (combined data), raltegravir (400 mg twice daily) plus optimized background therapy was generally well tolerated, with superior and durable antiretroviral and immunological efficacy, compared with optimized background therapy alone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations205
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatmentFrench-language works237,207