Immunization against pneumococcal disease in HIV-infected patients: conjugate versus polysaccharide vaccine before or after reconstitution of the immune system (CTN-147)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate whether patients should be immunized immediately or delay immunization until after reconstitution of the immune system and whether a conjugate or polysaccharide vaccine results in a better immunologic response. Seventy-nine patients were randomly assigned, utilizing a two by two factorial design to receive immediate immunization or delay immunization. Baseline characteristics were similar for the four arms: 78% men, median age 41 years, median time since HIV diagnosis 0.3 years, median CD4 60 cells/mm(3) and median HIV viral load 5.02 log copies/mL. Results in favour of delayed immunization were observed for those serotypes showing a response. The proportional odds ratios for delayed versus immediate immunization were 0.341 (P = 0.04) and 0.204 (P = 0.004) at months 6 and 12, respectively. No differences in immunological response were observed between the two individual vaccines for the shared serotypes studied. HIV-infected adults produced a higher immunological response to pneumococcal vaccine after reconstitution of the immune system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".