A multicentre real-life prospective cohort study on effectiveness, durability and safety of long-acting injectable cabotegravir and rilpivirine in northern Italy: the LONGITUDE study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We herein present a prospective multicentre experience of long-acting injectable (LAI) cabotegravir/rilpivirine from 11 different HIV clinics in northern Italy, focusing on the regimen's effectiveness, durability and safety in a real-life setting. METHODS: We included all people who received at least one dose of LAI cabotegravir/rilpivirine, recording clinical data, and assessing factors associated with treatment discontinuation (TD) for any cause. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate the probability of TD, and Cox regression models identified significant predictors of TD. A sub-analysis was conducted focusing on TD due to virological failure (VF, defined as two consecutive HIV-RNA values >200 copies/mL or a single value over 200 copies/mL leading to treatment withdrawal). RESULTS: We included 483 participants (81.6% males) with a median age of 49 (IQR: 40-58) years. In 74.1% of participants, the LA regimen was started by choice, with 51.8% coming from a dual oral antiretroviral regimen. During a median follow-up time of 22 (IQR: 13-26) months, 54 (11.1%) participants had TD (incidence = 0.627 per 100 person-months of follow-up), mostly due to side effects (31, 6.4%) but with 7 (1.4%) due to VF [with people reporting major integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) and NNRTI resistance mutations in 71.4% cases]. When multivariable analysis was performed, age, years with HIV, CD4/CD8 ratio and BMI were significantly associated with TD. Also, we detected that the number of previous antiretroviral regimens was significantly associated with VF. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the overall effectiveness, TD was observed in a specific subset of people, primarily due to side effects, with a smaller proportion experiencing VF. Factors associated with both TD and VF underscore the importance of personalized selection to optimize LAI cabotegravir/rilpivirine outcomes and to improve regimen persistence.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".