A Randomized Phase 1 Study Evaluating Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of a High‐Concentration, Long‐Acting Cabotegravir Formulation in Adults Without HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Long-acting (LA) cabotegravir 200-mg/mL (CAB200) injections are approved for HIV-1 prevention and as a complete LA HIV-1 treatment regimen with rilpivirine. A high-concentration suspension formulation, cabotegravir 400 mg/mL (CAB400-D), was developed to enable less frequent dosing and self-administration. This phase 1, double-blind, randomized study (NCT04484337) evaluated intramuscular (IM) gluteal, subcutaneous (SC) abdominal, and IM thigh CAB400-D injections (200-800 mg [0.5-2.0 mL]) in adults without HIV, using CAB200 injections as active control. Co-administration with recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20), topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, or topical steroid was evaluated for some SC injections. Pharmacokinetics, adverse events (AEs), and participant-reported outcomes were assessed. Overall, 138 participants were enrolled. Absorption was faster with CAB400-D versus CAB200. Within 4 weeks, CAB400-D plasma exposures were similar across administration routes and higher than those of CAB200. Co-administration with rHuPH20 increased the spontaneous absorption rate of CAB400-D but not CAB200. No deaths or drug-related serious AEs were observed. Five (4%) participants discontinued treatment due to AEs (injection-site reactions [ISRs], n = 3 discontinuations). Most (99%) participants experienced ≥ 1 ISR. Participants reported good acceptability of injections. Although CAB400-D injections demonstrated acceptable safety/tolerability, faster absorption than CAB200 limited potential dosing intervals to monthly dosing. Alternative cabotegravir formulations with longer dosing intervals are under clinical evaluation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".