Estradiol Levels Are Altered in Human Immunodeficiency Virus–Infected Pregnant Women Randomized to Efavirenz-Versus Lopinavir/Ritonavir-Based Antiretroviral Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) use in pregnancy has been associated with hormonal dysregulation. We performed a secondary retrospective analysis of longitudinal progesterone and estradiol levels in pregnancy using specimens from the Protease Inhibitors to Reduce Malaria Morbidity in HIV-infected Pregnant Women study, which randomized Ugandan human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected ART-naive women to initiate either lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)-based or efavirenz (EFV)-based cART. Methods: Three hundred twenty-six women (160 randomized to the EFV arm and 166 women to the LPV/r arm) with at least 1 plasma sample collected during pregnancy were included. Enrollment samples collected prior to cART initiation were used as a cART-naive comparator group. Hormone levels were quantified by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Results: Estradiol levels were differentially affected by the 2 cART regimens. Exposure to LPV/r was associated with an increase in estradiol (P < .0001), whereas exposure to EFV was associated with a decrease in estradiol (P < .0001), relative to the cART-naive gestationally matched comparator group. Lower estradiol levels correlated with small for gestational age (SGA) (P = .0019) and low birth weight (P = .019) in the EFV arm, while higher estradiol levels correlated with SGA in the LPV/r arm (P = .027). Although progesterone levels were similar between treatment arms, we observed an association between SGA and lower progesterone in the LPV/r arm (P = .04). No association was observed between hormone levels and preterm birth in either arm. Levels of progesterone and estradiol were lower in cases of stillbirth, and levels of both hormones declined immediately prior to stillbirth in 5 of 8 cases. Conclusions: Combination ART regimens differentially affect estradiol levels in pregnancy, a hormone critical to the maintenance of a healthy pregnancy. Identifying cART regimens that minimize perinatal HIV transmission without contributing to hormonal dysregulation represents an urgent public health priority. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT00993031.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".