Tipranavir in highly antiretroviral treatment-experienced patients: Results from a French prospective cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In highly antiretroviral-experienced patients with a multidrug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, recommended regimens should preferentially contain 3 active components, including a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r). Tipranavir/r (TPV/r), a non-peptidic PI, has been specifically developed for patients resistant to the usual antiretroviral classes including PIs. This paper discusses the role of TPV/r in patients experiencing multiple PI resistance. METHODS: Virological, immunological, and safety outcomes were collected between 2003 and 2007 at 7 clinical units. Virus resistance assessment was based on 3 different genotypic tests. The 207 patients evaluated had previously received nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) and PIs. RESULTS: The main drugs co-administered with TPV/r were 1 or 2 NRTIs associated, in half of the patients, with enfuvirtide. After 12 weeks, viral load was <50 copies/ml in 38% of the patients (44% with enfuvirtide), while median CD4 counts had increased from 150 to 250 cells/mm³. Genotypic testing suggested that most of the patients had viruses susceptible to TPV. Lipid and transaminase levels were slightly modified, and less than 10% of treatment discontinuations were due to gastrointestinal events. CONCLUSION: A regimen including TPV/r associated with at least 1 active component is a valuable option in highly ARV-experienced patients with multi-resistance to the usual ARV classes including PIs.
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".