Analytical treatment interruption as a tool in the evaluation of immune-mediated interventions for long-term antiretroviral-free control of HIV-1 among people with HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immune-mediated interventions have the potential to induce long-term antiretroviral treatment (ART)-free viral suppression in people with HIV. However, in the absence of biomarkers of viral control, studies looking at immune interventions require a planned long-term analytical treatment interruption (ATI) that may bring risks to participants and challenges for data interpretation. Herein, we describe an ongoing, global, proof-of-concept, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2 clinical trial with a planned ATI and illustrate how those risks have been mitigated to safely evaluate the long-term durability of ART-free viral control. METHODS: The trial evaluates an immunologic combination of low-dose budigalimab and trosunilimab administered during ATI. Adults aged 18-70 with confirmed HIV-1 on stable ART with viremia below the limit of detection and CD4+ counts >500 cells/mL willing to undergo ATI are randomized to receive budigalimab, trosunilimab, both (at 2 different trosunilimab doses), or neither. The primary efficacy endpoint is the proportion of participants achieving viral control (HIV-1 RNA <1000 copies/mL) without restarting ART at week 24. The planned ATI duration (≤112 weeks) evaluates the durability of off-ART viral control, long-term safety, and biomarkers. Key ATI elements align with published consensus recommendations [1] while incorporating feedback from members of the global HIV community. CONCLUSIONS: By sharing this study design, we hope to inform on the lessons learned from operationalizing a global study evaluating durable ART-free viral control, including the critical role of engaging members of the HIV community during clinical trial design to ensure the success of an ATI-inclusive study.
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 | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".