Long-term effect of temporary ART initiated during primary HIV-1 infection on viral persistence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) during primary HIV-1 infection (PHI) has been proposed to limit the formation of HIV-1 reservoirs. However, it remains unknown whether temporary ART initiated during PHI has a long-term effect on viral persistence. Here, we longitudinally quantify HIV-1 persistence markers and immunological parameters in the participants (n = 64) of a randomized controlled trial comparing 24 or 60 weeks of temporary ART vs. no treatment during PHI, who subsequently (re)initiated ART during chronic HIV-1 infection (CHI) after a median period of 116 weeks without treatment (ISRCTN59497461). Levels of several HIV-1 persistence markers (cell-associated unspliced RNA, total DNA, and intact DNA) do not significantly differ and strongly positively correlate between early and CHI ART periods in the same participants. Early ART is associated with lower HIV-1 proviral sequence diversity and superior restoration of the CD4/CD8 ratio, as well as lower levels of monocyte activation markers, compared to CHI ART, in the same participants. At CHI ART, intact HIV-1 DNA negatively correlates with HIV-specific T-cell responses. Finally, levels of HIV-1 persistence markers during CHI ART are lower in participants who had been pre-treated during PHI, indicating a long-term suppressive effect of temporary early ART on the persistence of HIV-1 reservoir.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".