MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2406362442 · doi:10.3851/imp2908

Post-Marketing Experience with Nevirapine Extended Release (XR) Tablets: Effectiveness and Tolerability in a Population-Based Cohort in British Columbia, Canada

2014· article· en· W2406362442 on OpenAlexaffabout
Katherine J. Lepik, Benita Yip, Rachel A. McGovern, Erin Ding, Adriana Nohpal, Birgit Watson, Junine Toy, Linda Akagi, P. Richard Harrigan, David Moore, Robert S. Hogg, Julio Montaner, Rolando Barrios

Bibliographic record

VenueAntiviral Therapy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsAIDS VancouverSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNevirapineTolerabilityMedicineInternal medicineAdverse effectPopulationPharmacologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Viral loadImmunologyAntiretroviral therapyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Nevirapine 400 mg extended release tablets (nevirapine-XR) are a once-daily alternative to nevirapine 200 mg immediate release tablets (nevirapine-IR). Study objectives were to describe the effectiveness and tolerability of nevirapine-XR in clinical practice and, for patients who switched from once daily 2×200 mg nevirapine-IR to nevirapine-XR, compare virological suppression and plasma nevirapine concentrations during each treatment period. METHODS: HIV-1-infected adults entered the study cohort if they initiated nevirapine-XR in British Columbia (BC) Canada between 1 April 2012 and 30 September 2012 and were followed until 30 September 2013. Demographic and clinical variables were abstracted from the BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS databases. Patients who switched from once daily nevirapine-IR to nevirapine-XR were monitored for 6 months pre- and post-switch with comparison of virological suppression (McNeamer's test) and median random plasma nevirapine concentrations (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test) in each period. RESULTS: The 536 nevirapine-XR-treated patients were 96% male, median (IQR) age 49.9 (44.0-56.9) years. Median follow-up was 15.6 (14.7-16.5) months, with 474/536 (88%) maintaining virological suppression. Emergent drug resistance developed in 5/536 (1%), adverse drug reactions in 17/536 (3%) and, although 31/536 (6%) reported 'whole' tablets in their stools, this was not associated with adverse outcomes. Among the 305 patients who switched from nevirapine-IR to nevirapine-XR, median (IQR) random plasma nevirapine concentration was higher during nevirapine-IR 5,000 (3,690-6,090) ng/ml than nevirapine-XR 3,930 (3,050-5,150) ng/ml (P<0.001), but there was no difference in virological suppression, 89% and 87% respectively (P=0.414). CONCLUSIONS: This post-marketing study affirms the effectiveness and tolerability of nevirapine-XR as an alternative to nevirapine-IR in adults.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntiviral TherapySame topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatmentFrench-language works237,207