MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220827881 · doi:10.1016/s2352-3018(22)00004-2

Kidney function in tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based oral pre-exposure prophylaxis users: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature and a multi-country meta-analysis of individual participant data

2022· article· en· W4220827881 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet HIV · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsManitoba Health
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthWorld Health OrganizationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsTenofovirRenal functionMEDLINEPre-exposure prophylaxisHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)RilpivirineSystematic review

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous WHO guidance on tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) suggests measuring creatinine levels at PrEP initiation and regularly afterwards, which might represent barriers to PrEP implementation and uptake. We aimed to systematically review published literature on kidney toxicity among tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based oral PrEP users and conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) on kidney function among PrEP users in a global implementation project dataset. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched PubMed up to June 30, 2021, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies that reported on graded kidney-related adverse events among oral PrEP users (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based PrEP alone or in combination with emtricitabine or lamivudine). We extracted summary data and conducted meta-analyses with random-effects models to estimate relative risks of grade 1 and higher and grade 2 and higher kidney-related adverse events, measured by elevated serum creatinine or decline in estimated creatinine clearance or estimated glomerular filtration rate. The IPDMA included (largely unpublished) individual participant data from 17 PrEP implementation projects and two RCTs. Estimated baseline creatinine clearance and creatinine clearance change after initiation were described by age, gender, and comorbidities. We used random-effects regressions to estimate the risk in decline of creatinine clearance to less than 60 mL/min. FINDINGS: =0%), although the grade 2 and higher association was not statistically significant and events were rare (13 out of 6764 in the intervention group vs six out of 6782 in the control group). The IPDMA included 18 676 individuals from 15 countries (1453 [7·8%] from RCTs) and 79 (0·42%) had a baseline estimated creatinine clearance of less than 60 mL/min (increasing proportions with increasing age). Longitudinal analyses included 14 368 PrEP users and 349 (2·43%) individuals had a decline to less than 60 mL/min creatinine clearance, with higher risks associated with increasing age and baseline creatinine clearance of 60·00-89·99 mL/min (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 8·49, 95% CI 6·44-11·20) and less than 60 mL/min (aHR 20·83, 12·83-33·82). INTERPRETATION: RCTs suggest that risks of kidney-related adverse events among tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based oral PrEP users are increased but generally mild and small. Our global PrEP user analysis found varying risks by age and baseline creatinine clearance. Kidney function screening and monitoring might focus on older individuals, those with baseline creatinine clearance of less than 90 mL/min, and those with kidney-related comorbidities. Less frequent or optional screening among younger individuals without kidney-related comorbidities may reduce barriers to PrEP implementation and use. FUNDING: Unitaid, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, WHO.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.185
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations30
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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