MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943519321 · doi:10.1016/s2589-7500(19)30006-8

Two-way mobile phone intervention compared with standard-of-care adherence support after second-line antiretroviral therapy failure: a multinational, randomised controlled trial

2019· article· en· W2943519321 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Robert Gross, Justin Ritz, Michael D. Hughes, Robert A. Salata, Peter Mugyenyi, Evelyn Hogg, Linda Wieclaw, Catherine Godfrey, Carole L. Wallis, John W. Mellors, Victor Mudhune, Sharlaa Badal‐Faesen, Beatriz Grinsztejn, Ann C. Collier

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Digital Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthACT GovernmentChiang Mai UniversityČeské Vysoké Učení Technické v PrazeNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCancer Research SocietyFogarty International CenterNational Institute of Mental HealthChienkuo Technology UniversityUniversity of the Witwatersrand, JohannesburgAbbVieJanssen PharmaceuticalsGilead SciencesFoundation for the National Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialViral loadPhysical therapyClinical trialCohortFamily medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Internal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) non-adherence causes HIV treatment failure. Past behaviour might predict future behaviour; failing second-line ART could indicate ongoing risk for subsequent non-adherence. We aimed to find out whether a two-way mobile phone-based communication intervention would increase HIV treatment success by improving medication adherence. Methods: We did a multinational, randomised controlled trial of patients at 17 sites in nine lower-income and middle-income countries in Africa, Asia, and the Americas. Patients aged 18 years and older, with HIV infection, and on second-line protease-inhibitor-based antiretroviral regimens, were randomly assigned (1:1) to either two-way mobile phone intervention plus standard of care (MPI + SOC) adherence support or standard-of-care alone (SOC). Our study was nested within a strategy study of ART after second-line ART failure (the main study, A5288). The main study had four cohorts, which were assigned regimens according to ART history and real-time genotype. Randomisation was stratified by the main study cohort with dynamic institutional balancing. Only the clinical management committee was masked, not the participants or site personnel. Text messages were sent over 48 weeks starting once a day and tapering down to once per week; participants were to respond once to each message if taking ART without issues. Repeated non-response to three messages over a 2-week period for the first 8 weeks, and then two messages over a 2-week period for the remainder of the study, triggered problem-solving counselling by staff. For this study, the primary endpoint was plasma HIV-1 RNA 200 copies per mL or less at 48 weeks and the secondary endpoint was virological failure (two consecutive HIV-1 RNA ≥1000 copies per mL) at 24 or more weeks. Prespecified intention-to- treat analyses were adjusted for cohort. Follow-up continued until the last participant had reached 48 weeks, with a median follow-up time of 72 weeks. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number . Findings: copies per mL (IQR 3.5 to 5-2). At week 48, HIV-1 RNA 200 copies per mL or less was reached in 169 (66%) of 257 patients in the MPI + SOC group and 164 (62%) of 264 patients in the SOC group (estimated difference 3-6% [95% CI -4-6% to 11-9%]; p=0-39). The adjusted odds ratio comparing MPI + SOC and SOC was 1-23 (0-82 to 1-84; p=0-32). Virological failure occurred in 66 (26%) patients in the MPI + SOC group and 89 (34%) patients in the SOC group during the median 72 weeks follow-up (adjusted p=0-027). Observed difference in virological failure favoured MPI + SOC in all cohorts. 23 (4%) participants died, 11 (4%) in the MPI + SOC group and 12 (5%) in the SOC group (p=0-89), with none of the deaths ascribed to ART, the MPI, or study procedures. Interpretation: Two-way MPI did not significantly improve week 48 suppression, but it did modestly affect virological failure. People failing second-line ART might not achieve benefits from phone-based triggers or enhanced adherence support (or both). More effective strategies are needed.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations56
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Digital HealthSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207