MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2503404095 · doi:10.7448/ias.19.1.20978

Long‐term effectiveness of initiating non‐nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor‐ versus ritonavir‐boosted protease inhibitor‐based antiretroviral therapy: implications for first‐line therapy choice in resource‐limited settings

2016· article· en· W2503404095 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Viviane D. Lima, Mark Hull, David A. McVea, William Chau, P. Richard Harrigan, Julio Montaner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International AIDS Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsAIDS VancouverUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineRegimenReverse-transcriptase inhibitorCartProtease inhibitor (pharmacology)Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase InhibitorViral loadRitonavirAntiretroviral therapyInternal medicineReverse transcriptaseVirologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Polymerase chain reaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: In many resource-limited settings, combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) failure is diagnosed clinically or immunologically. As such, there is a high likelihood that patients may stay on a virologically failing regimen for a substantial period of time. Here, we compared the long-term impact of initiating non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)- versus boosted protease inhibitor (bPI)-based cART in British Columbia (BC), Canada. METHODS: We followed prospectively 3925 ART-naïve patients who started NNRTIs (N=1963, 50%) or bPIs (N=1962; 50%) from 1 January 2000 until 30 June 2013 in BC. At six months, we assessed whether patients virologically failed therapy (a plasma viral load (pVL) >50 copies/mL), and we stratified them based on the pVL at the time of failure ≤500 versus >500 copies/mL. We then followed these patients for another six months and calculated their probability of achieving subsequent viral suppression (pVL <50 copies/mL twice consecutively) and of developing drug resistance. These probabilities were adjusted for fixed and time-varying factors, including cART adherence. RESULTS: At six months, virologic failure rates were 9.5 and 14.3 cases per 100 person-months for NNRTI and bPI initiators, respectively. NNRTI initiators who failed with a pVL ≤500 copies/mL had a 16% higher probability of achieving subsequent suppression at 12 months than bPI initiators (0.81 (25th-75th percentile 0.75-0.83) vs. 0.72 (0.61-0.75)). However, if failing NNRTI initiators had a pVL >500 copies/mL, they had a 20% lower probability of suppressing at 12 months than pVL-matched bPI initiators (0.37 (0.29-0.45) vs. 0.46 (0.38-0.54)). In terms of evolving HIV drug resistance, those who failed on NNRTI performed worse than bPI in all scenarios, especially if they failed with a viral load >500 copies/mL. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that patients who virologically failed at six months on NNRTI and continued on the same regimen had a lower probability of subsequently achieving viral suppression and a higher chance of evolving HIV drug resistance. These results suggest that improving access to regular virologic monitoring is critically important, especially if NNRTI-based cART is to remain a preferred choice for first-line therapy in resource-limited settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.773

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the International AIDS SocietySame topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatmentFrench-language works237,207