Quality of Life in Patients Treated with First-Line Antiretroviral Therapy Containing Nevirapine And/Or Efavirenz
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether differences in safety profiles between nevirapine (NVP) and efavirenz (EFV), as observed in the 2NN study, translated into differences in 'health related quality of life' (HRQoL). DESIGN: A sub-study of the 2NN study, with antiretroviral-naive patients randomly allocated to NVP (once or twice daily), EFV or NVP+EFV, in addition to stavudine and lamivudine. METHODS: Comparing differences in changes of HRQoL over 48 weeks as measured with the Medical Outcomes Study HIV Health Survey (MOS-HIV) questionnaire, using analysis of variance. RESULTS: The 2NN study enrolled 1216 patients. No validated questionnaires were available for 244 patients, and 55 patients had no HRQoL data at all, leaving 917 patients eligible for this sub-study. A total of 471 (51%) had HRQoL measurements both at baseline and week 48. The majority (69%) of patients without HRQoL measurements did, however, complete the study. The change in the physical health score (PHS) was 3.9 for NVP, 3.4 for EFV and 2.4 for NVP+EFV (P=0.712). For the mental health score (MHS) these values were 6.1, 7.0 and 3.9, respectively (P=0.098). A baseline plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration (pVL) > or = 100,000 copies/ml and a decline in pVL (per log10) were independently associated with an increase of PHS. An increase of MHS was only associated with pVL decline. Patients experiencing an adverse event during follow-up had a comparable change in PHS but a significantly smaller change in MHS, compared with those without an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: First-line ART containing NVP and/or EFV leads to an improvement in HRQoL. The gain in HRQoL was similar for NVP and EFV, but slightly lower for the combination of these drugs.
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) | 0.001 | 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".