Azithromycin Prophylaxis for Mycobacterium avium Complex during the Era of Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy: Evaluation of a Provincial Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) disease was evaluated in a provincial program of azithromycin prophylaxis. Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) was prescribed to 383 (65%) of 587 patients eligible for MAC prophylaxis (CD4 <75 cells/mm3). By use of an intent-to-treat analysis, MAC disease was observed in 21 of 271 patients who did not receive prophylaxis (incidence rate, 8 events per 100 person-years). MAC events occurred in 10 of 316 patients who received azithromycin (2.37 events per 100 person-years). Localized lymphadenitis compatible with immune reconstitution disease accounted for 23% of all MAC events, in contrast to studies in the pre-HAART era, where almost all cases were disseminated. None of the MAC isolates from the 10 prophylaxis failures were resistant to azithromycin. Azithromycin appeared to be protective against disseminated MAC in patients who were either unresponsive or nonadherent to HAART, but it did not prevent the development of immune reconstitution disease due to MAC.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".