The effect of oral preexposure prophylaxis on the progression of HIV-1 seroconversion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether oral preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) alters timing and patterns of seroconversion when PrEP use continues after HIV-1 infection. DESIGN: Retrospective testing of the timing of Fiebig stage HIV-1 seroconversion in the Partners PrEP Study, a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial of PrEP conducted in Kenya and Uganda. METHODS: Specimens from 138 seroconverters were collected every 3 months and when HIV-1 infection was suspected based on monthly rapid HIV-1 tests. Progression of seroconversion was compared between randomized groups (PrEP versus placebo) and per-protocol groups (placebo versus PrEP participants with detectable tenofovir during the seroconversion period) using laboratory assessment of Fiebig stage. Delay in site-detection of seroconversion and association with PrEP drug-regimen resistant virus were assessed using logistic regression. Analysis of time to each Fiebig stage used maximum likelihood estimation with a parametric model to accommodate the varying lengths of HIV-infection intervals. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in delayed site detection of infection associated with PrEP (odds ratio = 3.49, P = 0.044). Delay in detection was not associated with increased risk of resistance in the PrEP arm (odds ratio = 0.93, P = 0.95). Estimated time to each Fiebig stage was elongated in seroconverters with evidence of ongoing PrEP use, significantly for only Stage 5 (28 versus 17 days, P = 0.05). Adjusted for Fiebig stage, viral RNA was ∼2/3 log lower in those assigned to PrEP compared with placebo; no differences were found in Architect signal to cut-off at any stage. CONCLUSION: Ongoing PrEP use in seroconverters may delay detection of infection and elongate seroconversion, although the delay does not increase risk of resistance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".