MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996597631 · doi:10.1111/hiv.12835

Response to Noe, Oldenbuettel and Jaeger

2019· letter· en· W2996597631 on OpenAlexaff
SD Shafran, Giovanni Di Perri

Bibliographic record

VenueHIV Medicine · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTenofovir alafenamideMedicineEmtricitabineWeight gainDolutegravirWeight changeInternal medicineWeight lossClinical trialOncologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Body weightAntiretroviral therapyFamily medicineObesityViral load

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We thank Noe, Oldenbuettel and Jaeger for their interest in our article focusing on tenofovir alafenamide (TAF). They express concern that our article is “lacking a critical discussion about the increasing evidence of TAF promoting relevant weight gain.” We think that this is an unfair criticism because we submitted our manuscript before the initial uncontrolled report by Gomez et al. 1 was published and the ADVANCE study was presented and subsequently published 2. There were no reports of weight gain associated with TAF therapy at the time at which we submitted our article. As reported in our article, every randomized clinical trial comparing TAF to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) has shown improved renal and bone safety of TAF compared with TDF. Since publication of our paper, this was further supported by the DISCOVER study of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis which enrolled 5387 patients, 2694 of whom received emtricitabine (FTC) combined with TAF (FTC/TAF) and 2693 of whom received FTC/TDF. At week 48, there was a 1.0-kg increase in weight in FTC/TAF recipients compared with no change in weight in FTC/TDF recipients 3. While this difference was statistically significant in a study of nearly 5400 participants, its clinical significance is questionable. The weight gain in FTC/TAF recipients in the DISCOVER study is similar to the 1.1–1.3 kg weight gain at week 48 in the Gilead 4030 study 4, in which patients also received an integrase inhibitor (either dolutegravir or bictegravir), a drug class independently associated with weight gain, so the contribution of TAF to the small amount of weight gain in this study cannot be determined. The annual weight gain reported in patients receiving TAF in the DISCOVER study and the Gilead 4030 study is similar to normal annual weight gain in the general adult population 5. The ADVANCE study demonstrated greater weight gain at 48 weeks with TAF than with TDF in African patients who also received emtricitabine and dolutegravir, with a greater effect on weight in women than in men. It also demonstrated greater weight gain with dolutegravir than with efavirenz, when both were combined with TDF/FTC. The magnitude of weight gain 48 weeks after initiating antiretroviral therapy in this study in patients receiving dolutegravir in both the TDF- and TAF-containing arms has never been reported previously and may be unique to African patients, especially African women. A recent analysis of randomized clinical trials confirms that women and black patients gain more weight on antiretroviral therapy than men and non-black patients 6. This study demonstrated that low baseline CD4 count was the strongest predictor of weight gain 6, and it should be noted the CD4 counts at initiation of antiretroviral therapy are lower in Africa than in high-income countries. The modest increase in weight on TAF compared with TDF requires further study over extended periods of time in different populations, and such studies need to also measure weight gain-associated morbidities, such as type 2 diabetes mellitus and fatty liver disease. The practice of medicine frequently involves competing risks. Perhaps the indisputable improved renal and bone safety of TAF relative to TDF is associated with a slight increase in weight. If so, clinicians will need to consider the relative merits of the benefits and risks of TAF just as they do with all drug therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.252 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHIV MedicineSame topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatmentFrench-language works237,207