Predictors of incomplete viral response and virologic failure in patients with acute and early HIV infection. Results of Italian Network of ACuTe HIV InfectiON (INACTION) cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the factors that can influence an incomplete viral response (IVR) after acute and early HIV infection (AEHI). METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study including patients with AEHI (Fiebig stages I-V) diagnosed between January 2008 and December 2014 at 20 Italian centres. IVR was defined by: (1) viral blip (51-1000 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL after achievement of < 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL); (2) virologic failure [> 1000 copies/mL after achievement of < 200 copies/mL, or ≥ 200 copies/mL after 24 weeks on an antiretroviral therapy (ART)]; (3) suboptimal viral response (> 50 copies/mL after 48 weeks on ART or two consecutive HIV-1 RNA levels with ascending trend during ART). Cox regression analysis was used to calculate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for IVR. RESULTS: In all, 263 patients were studied, 227 (86%) males, with a median [interquartile range (IQR)] age of 38 (30-46) years. During a median follow-up of 13.0 (5.7-31.1) months, 38 (14.4%) had IVR. The presence of central nervous system (CNS) symptoms was linked to a higher risk of IVR (HR = 4.70, 95% CI: 1.56-14.17), while a higher CD4/CD8 cell count ratio (HR = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.03-0.51 for each point increase) and first-line ART with three-drug regimens recommended by current guidelines (HR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.18-0.91 compared with other regimens including four or five drugs, older drugs or non-standard backbones) were protective against IVR. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with lower CD4/CD8 ratio and CNS symptoms could be at a higher risk of IVR after AEHI. The use of recommended ART may be relevant for improving short-term viral efficacy in this group of patients.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".