Adverse drug reactions to integrase strand transfer inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe and compare integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) adverse drug reactions (ADRs) for raltegravir, elvitegravir-cobicistat, and dolutegravir. DESIGN: Population-based, retrospective cohort. METHODS: Antiretroviral-experienced and naive persons at least 19 years old were included if they received their first prescription for raltegravir, elvitegravir-cobicistat, or dolutegravir in British Columbia, Canada, in 2012-2014, and were followed for 2 years until 31 December 2016. The primary outcome was an ADR resulting in INSTI discontinuation. ADR rates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated by Poisson method. Cox proportional-hazards regression estimated the hazard ratio for ADR-related INSTI discontinuation, adjusted for confounders. ADR symptoms were compared across INSTIs. RESULTS: There were 1344 persons contributing 1464 person-INSTI exposures. The cohort was predominantly male (79%) and antiretroviral therapy-experienced (85%). ADR events and unadjusted ADR rates (95% CI) per 100 person-years were raltegravir 24 of 551 (4.4%), 2.91 (1.95, 4.35); elvitegravir-cobicistat 38 of 394 (9.6%), 5.94 (4.32, 8.16); and dolutegravir 27 of 519 (5.2%), 2.96 (2.03, 4.31). The ADR rate for elvitegravir-cobicistat was double that of dolutegravir (adjusted hazard ratio 2.24, 95% CI 1.13, 4.44), but not significantly different for either dolutegravir or elvitegravir versus raltegravir. Elvitegravir-cobicistat-treated persons had a significantly higher proportion of gastrointestinal and general (fatigue, malaise) ADRs. Neuropsychiatric ADRs were more frequent with dolutegravir, but not significantly different between INSTIs. Among those switching between INSTIs, there was no apparent relationship between experiencing an ADR to one INSTI and subsequent intolerance to another. CONCLUSIONS: This study affirms INSTIs are well tolerated during routine clinical use. Consideration of differences in side effect profiles can inform antiretroviral therapy individualization.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".