Evaluation of Injectable Calcium Hydroxylapatite for the Treatment of Facial Lipoatrophy Associated with Human Immunodeficiency Virus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of soft tissue augmentation with calcium hydroxylapatite (CaHA) microspheres in an aqueous gel in patients with facial lipoatrophy (FLA) secondary to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease. METHODS This 12-month open-label, prospective study enrolled 30 subjects (29 men and 1 woman) with HIV-associated FLA. After the initial treatment phase (up to 2 injections, 30 days apart), patients were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months. Patients were offered touch-up injections at 6 and 12 months. Measurements included confirmed changes in the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale and in cheek thickness. RESULTS Average initial treatment volume was 9.5 mL per patient (both sides); total volumes per patient after 12 months averaged 16.1 mL. At all time points, all patients were rated as improved or better and responded affirmatively to satisfaction questions. Cheek thickness measurements increased substantially over baseline (p<.001). Most commonly reported adverse events were edema (93%), ecchymosis (83%), and erythema (77%). CONCLUSIONS CaHA is an appropriate and well-tolerated treatment for patients with HIV-associated FLA. With an excellent safety profile, CaHA provides immediate correction of FLA and appears to provide lasting improvement in appearance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".