Uptake Success and Cost Savings from Switching to a Two-Drug Antiretroviral Regimen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emergence of dual therapy for antiretroviral (ARV)-experienced persons living with HIV (PWH) offers the opportunity to reduce lifetime exposure to unnecessary ARV drugs while maintaining viral suppression and reducing the cost of care. Our objective, using retrospective analysis of a quality care initiative, was to examine in routine clinical practice the clinical impact of switching PWH stable on a three-drug to a two-drug single-tablet formulation (STF) ARV regimen. We also examined the cost implications of this STF adjustment. Between January 1, 2020 and January 1, 2021 eligible patients (i.e., virally suppressed, no active hepatitis B infection, no documented nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors/integrase strand transfer inhibitor resistance) were offered, on a convenience basis and as part of routine care, the opportunity to adjust their current three-drug STF to a two-drug STF (dolutegarvair/lamivudine). The acceptance, clinical efficacy, safety, tolerability, and cost of treatment were measured for patients who switched in 2020. Of 989 eligible PWH, 408 were approached and 391 (39.5%) switched to two-drug regimen; 99% remained on the two-drug STF at year's end (median 240 days follow-up). Only 2/391 patients who switched lost viral control. The total ARV drug cost for all 989 patients decreased by 10.3% generating an actual savings of $1,596,666 among patients approached and switched in 2020. Patient interest and uptake in switching to two-drug STF was substantial and resulted in few discontinuations for any reason. It provided significant and immediate cost savings within the first year. Our results bring clarity to discussions on whether using two-drug regimens would be practical and acceptable in nonclinical trial settings.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".