Rates of Disease Progression among Human Immunodeficiency Virus–Infected Persons Initiating Multiple‐Drug Rescue Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To characterize survival and to compare rates of disease progression to death of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients, between those initiating multiple-drug rescue therapy (MDRT) and those antiretroviral-inexperienced initiating triple-drug antiretroviral therapy (ART), we conducted a population-based analysis of HIV-infected men and women aged > or =18 years in British Columbia, Canada. Cumulative mortality rates were estimated by use of Kaplan-Meier methods, and Cox-proportional hazard regression was used to model the simultaneous effect of prognostic variables on survival. Cumulative mortality at 36 months was 14.2%+/-2.0% and 10.9%+/-1.0% for the MDRT and triple-drug ART groups, respectively (P=.105, log-rank test). After adjustment for other baseline prognostic variables, MDRT was found not to be a predictor of increased all-cause mortality (relative risk, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.66) in multivariate analysis. Over the short-term, patients receiving MDRT had relatively low mortality. After adjustment for baseline prognostic factors, rates of survival were comparable with those in patients initiating triple-drug ART.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".