Development of drug resistance in patients receiving combinations of zidovudine, didanosine and nevirapine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the development of phenotypic and genotypic resistance to zidovudine, didanosine and nevirapine as a function of the virologic response to therapy in a group of drug-naive individuals receiving various combinations of these agents. DESIGN: All patients were enrolled in a double-blind controlled randomized trial (the INCAS study) and were selected for detailed resistance studies based on specimen availability and virologic response. METHODS: Within the three study groups (zidovudine/nevirapine, zidovudine/didanosine or zidovudine/nevirapine/didanosine), 16, 19 and 24 patients, respectively, had evaluable baseline isolates and remained in the study > 24 weeks. Phenotypic resistance to all three drugs was evaluated using the VIRCO recombinant virus assay. Genotypic sequencing was done on selected specimens from patients receiving zidovudine/nevirapine/didanosine. RESULTS: After 24 weeks, all available isolates taken from patients receiving nevirapine were resistant to this agent, while 18/21 (86%) patients receiving triple therapy carried such isolates at 30--60 weeks. At 24 weeks, zidovudine resistance developed in 4/40 isolates but was more frequent after 30--60 weeks, especially in patients on two drugs. The degree of zidovudine resistance (rise in concentration required for 50% inhibition) appeared lower in the triple therapy group compared with zidovudine/didanosine (P = 0.0004). All nevirapine-resistant isolates that were sequenced carried at least one mutation associated with resistance, most often K103N and/or Y181C. CONCLUSION: The use of highly active drug therapies may be associated with a beneficial effect on the development of antiretroviral drug resistance. The characteristics of virologic suppression that must be maintained to avoid resistance are currently being studied in hypothesis-driven clinical trials.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".