2510. Systematic Literature Review of Multiclass Resistance in Heavily Treatment Experienced Persons with HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Because of progress in antiretroviral therapy (ART), fewer people with HIV experience virologic failure with multiclass resistance. We sought to estimate the prevalence of multiclass resistance since the introduction of INSTI-based regimens using a systematic literature review. Methods A systematic literature search using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted of articles published since 2008, the year when INSTI-based regimens for treatment-experienced people with HIV became widely used. Bibliographies of existing literature reviews, websites of European and International organizations reporting data on HIV and AIDS, and abstracts presented from 2016–2018 at conferences were searched to identify additional relevant studies. Using predefined criteria, two reviewers independently reviewed studies reporting multiclass (three-class or greater) resistance in persons with HIV infection who are treatment experienced and were either perinatally infected or infected as adults. Studies from Western Europe, Australia, Canada and the United States (US) using any type of resistance definitions and resistance tests were included. Results A total of 441 unique articles were identified, 343 were excluded during level 1 screening and 98 articles were included for full-text review. A total of 34 articles (11 US studies, 3 from Canada, 1 from Australia, and 19 from Western European countries.) met the inclusion criteria and were included in data extraction analysis. Over the past decade, a modest decrease in the prevalence of three-class (NNRTI, NRTI, PI) resistance was observed in studies from the United States and Canada, ranging from 8.3% in 2009 to 6.7% in 2014 (Figure 1). Western European countries and Australia showed similar trends. The prevalence of 4-class resistance (including INSTIs) with virologic failure in the current treatment era is low, less than 2% (Figure 2). Conclusion The prevalence of multiclass resistance has decreased over the past decade, with three-class resistance continuing to decline and four-class resistance rare. Although the population with treatment failure and no viable options for a suppressive regimen is currently small, this group of people with HIV are in urgent need of novel treatment options. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".