MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tenofovir-Based Preexposure Prophylaxis for HIV Infection Among African Women

2015· article· en· W4233826505 on OpenAlexaff
Jeanne Marrazzo, Gita Ramjee, Barbra A. Richardson, Kailazarid Gomez, Nyaradzo Mgodi, Gonasagrie Nair, Clemensia Nakabiito, Ariane van der Straten, Lisa Noguchi, Craig W. Hendrix, James Y. Dai, Shayhana Ganesh, Baningi Mkhize, Marthinette Taljaard, Urvi M. Parikh, Jeanna Piper, Benoı̂t Mâsse, Cynthia Grossman, James F. Rooney, Jill L. Schwartz, Heather Watts, Mark A. Marzinke, Sharon L. Hillier, Ian McGowan, Zvavahera M. Chirenje

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePre-exposure prophylaxisRegimenEmtricitabinePopulationRandomized controlled trialPlaceboPsychological interventionAdverse effectMen who have sex with menHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Internal medicineViral loadImmunologyEnvironmental healthAntiretroviral therapyAlternative medicineSyphilisNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reproductive-age African women and others at high risk of acquiring human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection need effective interventions to prevent acquisition of this virus. Previous studies have demonstrated that daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) alone or TDF combined with emtricitabine (FTC) (TDF-FTC) reduces the risk of HIV transmission by at least 50% in men who have sex with men, heterosexuals, and injection-drug users (with greater effectiveness in subjects with high adherence to the regimen). However, daily tenofovir (TFV)–based regimens were found to be ineffective in preventing HIV-1 acquisition among women in the Preexposure Prophylaxis Trial for HIV Prevention among African Women (FEM-PrEP) when adherence to the regimen was less than 40%. The Vaginal and Oral Interventions to Control the Epidemic (VOICE) trial was a randomized, placebo-controlled trial that assessed the effectiveness of daily treatment with oral TDF, oral TDF-FTC, or 1% TFV vaginal gel in preventing sexually acquired HIV-1 infection in women in South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Adverse effects of the regimens were also assessed. Monthly HIV tests and quarterly blood testing were performed. From September 2009 through June 2011, 12,320 women were screened at 15 sites in South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Of these, 5029 were enrolled in the study and randomized. Retention in the trial was excellent; 91% of women completed follow-up visits. The primary effectiveness end point, HIV-1 infection, was identified by seroconversion and assessed in a modified intention-to-treat population. There were 312 HIV-1 infections among study participants; the incidence of infection was 5.7 per 100 person-years. None of the TFV-based regimens were effective in reducing HIV-1 transmission: effectiveness was −49.0% for TDF alone (hazard ratio [HR] for infection, 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97–2.29), −4.4% for TDF-FTC (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.73–1.49), and 14.5% for TFV gel (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.61–1.21). Adherence appeared to be high (86%) based on women's returns of empty pill boxes and gel applicators. However, measurable drug plasma levels in random samples were only 30% for TDF, 29% for TDF-FTC, and 25% for TFV gel. Independent predictors of adherence included being married, being older than 25 years, and being multiparous. There were elevated serum creatinine levels more frequently among participants who received oral TDF-FTC compared with oral placebo (1.3% vs 0.2%, P = 0.004). No significant differences were noted in the frequencies of other adverse events. Consistent with the findings of other studies, these data show that TDF-based regimens proven to prevent HIV infection are ineffective when adherence is poor.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations66
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveySame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207