Assessment of HBV flare in a randomized clinical trial in HIV/HBV coinfected subjects initiating HBV-active antiretroviral therapy in Thailand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hepatic Flare (HF) after initiation of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in HIV-HBV coinfected individuals is well recognized but prospective data on predictors and subsequent outcome are limited. METHODS: The Tenofovir in HIV-HBV coinfection study was a randomized clinical trial of HBV-active HAART including lamivudine and/or tenofovir in antiretroviral naïve HIV-HBV individuals in Thailand. RESULTS: Early HF (EHF) was defined as ALT > 5 × ULN during the first 12 weeks. EHF was observed in 8 (22%) of individuals at a median of 56 days. 6/8 EHF cases were asymptomatic and resolved with HAART continuation, however one subject with underlying cirrhosis died following rapid hepatic decompensation. EHF was significantly associated with higher baseline ALT (79 IU/L vs 36 IU/L non-EHF, p = 0.008) and HBV DNA (9.9 log10 c/ml vs 8.4 log10 c/ml non EHF, p = 0.009), and subsequent serological change. HBeAg loss occurred in 75% of EHF cases versus 22% in non-EHF (p = 0.04), and HBsAg loss in 25% of EHF cases versus 4% of non-EHF (p = 0.053). CONCLUSION: EHF after HBV active HAART initiation was frequently observed in this population. Timing of EHF, association with elevated ALT and HBV DNA and high rate of seroconversion are all consistent with immune restoration as the likely underlying process. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00192595.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".