Temporary antiretroviral treatment during primary <scp>HIV</scp>‐1 infection has a positive impact on health‐related quality of life: data from the Primo‐<scp>SHM</scp> cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to compare health-related quality of life (HRQL) over 96 weeks in patients receiving no treatment or 24 or 60 weeks of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) during primary HIV-1 infection (PHI). METHODS: A multicentre prospective cohort study of PHI patients, with an embedded randomized trial, was carried out. HRQL was assessed with the Medical Outcomes Study Health Survey for HIV (MOS-HIV) and a symptom checklist administered at weeks 0, 8, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84 and 96. Mixed linear models were used for the analysis of differences in HRQL among the three groups. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients were included in the study: 28 received no treatment, 45 received 24 weeks of cART and 39 received 60 weeks of cART. Over 96 weeks of follow-up, the groups receiving 24 and 60 weeks of cART had better cognitive functioning than the no-treatment group (P = 0.005). Patients receiving 60 weeks of cART had less pain (P = 0.004), better role functioning (P = 0.001), better physical functioning (P = 0.02) and a better physical health summary score (P = 0.006) than the groups receiving no treatment or 24 weeks of cART. Mental health was better in patients receiving 24 weeks of cART than in patients in the no-treatment group or the group receiving 60 weeks of cART (P = 0.02). At week 8, patients in the groups receiving 24 and 60 weeks of cART reported more nausea (P = 0.002), diarrhoea (P < 0.001), abdominal pain (P = 0.02), stomach pain (P = 0.049) and dizziness (P = 0.01) than those in the no-treatment group. These differences had disappeared by week 24. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary cART during PHI had a significant positive impact on patients' HRQL as compared with no treatment, despite the initial, short-term occurrence of more physical symptoms, probably related to drug toxicity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".