Five-Year Follow up of Once-Daily Therapy with Emtricitabine, Didanosine and Efavirenz (Montana ANRS 091 Trial)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Once-daily combination therapy with emtricitabine, didanosine and efavirenz has been highly effective in clinical trials but its long-term efficacy and safety has not been previously reported. METHODS: This multicentre, single-arm, open-label trial enrolled 40 antiretroviral-naive HIV-1-infected patients who received a once-daily regimen of emtricitabine, didanosine and efavirenz. The objective was to assess the long-term effects of this combination on plasma HIV RNA levels, CD4+ T-cell counts, safety and tolerability. RESULTS: After 5 years, 73% and 68% of patients had plasma HIV RNA levels < 400 and < 50 copies/ml, respectively, in an intent-to-treat, missing-equals-failure analysis. Genotypic resistance on treatment emerged in six patients. There was a significant increase in CD4+ T-cell count of 294 x 10(6) cells/l. Only six patients discontinued study treatment, because of non-severe adverse events. Lipodystrophy was infrequent, and lipid and glucose profiles were favourable with a significant increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. CONCLUSION: A convenient once-daily regimen of emtricitabine, didanosine and efavirenz provided durable antiretroviral response and was well tolerated through 5 years of therapy.
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".