Virologic Failure Following Persistent Low-level Viremia in a Cohort of HIV-Positive Patients: Results From 12 Years of Observation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The current goal of antiretroviral therapy (ART) is to maintain a suppressed human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) viral load below limits of assay detection. When viral loads remain in low-level viremia (LLV), especially between 50 and 200 copies/mL, the best management and clinical consequences remain unknown. Our objective was to study the long-term impact of persistent LLV on the subsequent risk of virologic failure in a cohort of people living with HIV in Montreal, Canada. METHODS: We compared the cumulative incidence of subsequent virologic failure (defined as an HIV RNA viral load of >1000 copies/mL) in patients receiving ART for at least 12 months by following 4 persistence categories (<50, 50-199, 200-499, and 500-999 copies/mL) for 6, 9, or 12 months, using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The association between subsequent virologic failure and persistence status were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of virologic failure 1 year after having maintained a LLV for 6 months was 22.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.9-33.6) for 50-199 copies/mL, 24.2% (95% CI, 14.5-38.6) for 200-499 copies/mL, and 58.9% (95% CI, 43.1-75.2) for 500-999 copies/mL, compared with 6.6% (95% CI, 5.3-8.2) for an undetectable HIV RNA viral load. Even after adjustment for potential confounders, a persistent LLV of 50-199 copies/mL for 6 months doubled the risk of virologic failure (hazard ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.60-3.09), compared with undetectable viral loads for the same duration. Similar results have been found for persistent LLV of 9 or 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, all categories of persistent LLV between 50 and 999 copies/mL were associated with an increased risk of virologic failure. The results shed new light for the management of patients with LLV, especially with regard to LLV of 50-199 copies/mL.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".