Initial Therapy with Protease Inhibitor-Sparing Regimens: Evaluation of Nevirapine and Delavirdine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have compared the results (on-treatment analyses) of 2 randomized clinical trials of protease inhibitor-sparing regimens in drug-naive patients. In the INCAS (Italy, Netherlands, Canada, Australia) study, the mean decrease in plasma viral load over 52 weeks was 2.2 log(10) copies/mL in 40 patients who were receiving zidovudine/didanosine/nevirapine (18 [45%] had maximal suppression), with a mean increase in CD4 T cell counts of 139 cells/microL. In protocol 0021 Part II, the mean decrease in plasma viral load over 52 weeks was 2.1 log(10) copies/mL in 34 patients who were receiving zidovudine/lamivudine/delavirdine (20 [59%] had maximal suppression), with a mean increase in CD4 T cell counts of 88 cells/microL. The virologic and immunologic efficacy of the 2 triple-drug regimens are similar. Until results of long-term studies are available to establish whether a preferred approach to initial therapy exists, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors may be a valuable alternative to protease inhibitors in the initial therapy of antiretroviral-naive, moderately immunosuppressed patients.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".