Combination Therapy with Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate/Emtricitabine/Elvitegravir/Cobicistat Plus Darunavir Once Daily in Antiretroviral-Naive and Treatment-Experienced Patients: A Retrospective Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with drug-resistant HIV often require complex antiretroviral regimens. However, combining fixed-dose combination tablets such as tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate, emtricitabine, and cobicistat-boosted elvitegravir (TDF/FTC/EVG/cobi) with darunavir (DRV) can provide a simple, once-daily (QD), 2-tablet regimen for patients with drug-resistant HIV. Primary objective was to determine the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA <40 copies/mL at 48 weeks. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients initiated on TDF/FTC/EVG/cobi plus DRV. RESULTS: Among the 21 included patients, prior resistance showed a median of 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor mutations, 1 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase mutation, and 1 protease inhibitor mutation. At week 48, 14 (67%) patients achieved HIV-1 RNA <40 copies/mL, 1 patient experienced viral rebound, and 6 (29%) had missing data or discontinued therapy. No patient discontinued for adverse events. CONCLUSION: According to this observational study, QD TDF/FTC/EVG/cobi plus DRV is considered safe, well tolerated, and generally effective in suppressing HIV drug-resistant virus.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".