Type 1 Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV-1) Incidence, Adherence, and Drug Resistance in Individuals Taking Daily Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate for HIV-1 Pre-exposure Prophylaxis: Pooled Analysis From 72 Global Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF) has high efficacy against HIV-1 acquisition. Seventy-two prospective studies of daily oral F/TDF PrEP were conducted to evaluate HIV-1 incidence, drug resistance, adherence, and bone and renal safety in diverse settings. METHODS: HIV-1 incidence was calculated from incident HIV-1 diagnoses after PrEP initiation and within 60 days of discontinuation. Tenofovir concentrations in dried blood spots (DBS), drug resistance, and bone/renal safety indicators were evaluated in a subset of studies. RESULTS: Among 17 274 participants, there were 101 cases with new HIV-1 diagnosis (.77 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI]: .63-.94). In 78 cases with resistance data, 18 (23%) had M184I or V, 1 (1.3%) had K65R, and 3 (3.8%) had both mutations. In 54 cases with tenofovir concentration data from DBS, 45 (83.3%), 2 (3.7%), 6 (11.1%), and 1 (1.9%) had average adherence of <2, 2-3, 4-6, and ≥7 doses/wk, respectively, and the corresponding incidence was 3.9 (95% CI: 2.9-5.3), .24 (.060-.95), .27 (.12-.60), and .054 (.008-.38) per 100 person-years. Adherence was low in younger participants, Hispanic/Latinx and Black participants, cisgender women, and transgender women. Bone and renal adverse event incidence rates were 0.69 and 11.8 per 100 person-years, respectively, consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSIONS: Leveraging the largest pooled analysis of global PrEP studies to date, we demonstrate that F/TDF is safe and highly effective, even with less than daily dosing, in diverse clinical settings, geographies, populations, and routes of HIV-1 exposure.
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 | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".