Levels of adherence to contemporary antiretroviral regimens and the likelihood of viral suppression: a cohort study in a Brazilian metropolis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Levels of adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) can affect the likelihood of viral suppression differentially among ART regimens. In this prospective cohort conducted in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, we included 354 individuals who initiated ART containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/lamivudine/efavirenz in fixed-dose combination (TDF/3TC/EFV) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/lamivudine associated with dolutegravir (TDF/3TC + DTG). Viral suppression (viral load <50 copies/mL) was evaluated within six months of follow-up at different adherence levels and by therapeutic regimen. Adherence was measured by the Proportion of Days Covered (PDC) and classified into low (≤84%), intermediate (85-89%) or high (≥90%). The association between viral suppression, adherence levels, and other explanatory variables was analyzed using chi-square and multivariable logistic regression. Viral suppression was achieved by 76.0% of individuals and was more frequent among those who achieved higher levels of adherence (high adherence: 79.3%, intermediate: 71.4% and low: 45.2%), those on TDF/3TC + DTG, and those who had viral load ≤100,000 copies/mL at the onset of treatment (p < 0.05). Moreover, individuals on TDF/3TC + DTG had an approximately 90% probability of achieving viral suppression at intermediate adherence levels. These results add new insights on the possibility of lower adherence levels for contemporary antiretroviral regimens currently used as first-line therapy worldwide.
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 | 0.001 | 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".