MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416566942 · doi:10.1007/s40121-025-01252-w

Quality of Life and Treatment Satisfaction in People with HIV Switching to Bictegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide: Pooled Analysis from Observational Cohort Studies

2025· article· en· W4416566942 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrea Antinori, Yoshiyuki Yokomaku, Hila Elinav, Hüsnü Pullukçu, Joss de Wet, Antonio Antela, Po‐Liang Lu, Michael Sabranski, Yeon-sook Kim, Fabrice Bonnet, Jan den Hollander, Arthur Jackson, Chiaw Yee Choy, Weiping Cai, Fujie Zhang, David Thorpe, Andrea Marongiu, Rebecca Harrison, James Jarrett, Marta Boffito

Bibliographic record

VenueInfectious Diseases and Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyPooled analysisCohortQuality of life (healthcare)Cohort studyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Meta-analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide important insights into individuals' health and well-being. We report PROs from six observational cohort studies in treatment-experienced people with HIV switching to bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Data were pooled from the BICtegravir Single Tablet Regimen (BICSTaR) cohort studies (Asia/Canada/EU/Israel/Japan) and a similarly designed Chinese cohort study (GS-CN-380-5759). Quality of life (QoL; mental/physical health) and HIV treatment satisfaction were self-reported by participants using the generic (non-HIV-specific) 36-item Short Form Health Survey questionnaire and HIV Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (HIVTSQ; status [s]/change), respectively. Descriptive statistics and linear mixed models adjusted for potential confounders and interactions, with bootstrapped confidence intervals, were used to analyse PROs through 24 months (12 months for treatment satisfaction). RESULTS: Of 3724 treatment-experienced participants included, 64.2% were Asian, 89.0% male; median age was 41 years. Baseline Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores were below the population average despite receiving antiretroviral therapy, whereas Physical Component Summary (PCS) scores were above average. At 24 months, observed median MCS score improved from baseline (+ 0.6 [interquartile range [IQR] - 4.3 to + 5.9; p = 0.018]) and median PCS score remained stable (- 0.1 [IQR - 3.3 to + 3.3; p = 0.998]). In all key populations, predicted adjusted MCS/PCS scores showed small improvements or remained stable over time. Treatment satisfaction was high at baseline (median HIVTSQs score 55 [IQR 49-60]), with participants reporting improved treatment satisfaction following the switch to B/F/TAF compared with their previous regimen (+ 27 [19-30] at 12 months). Similar improvements were observed across all key populations. CONCLUSION: In this large cohort of people with HIV who switched to B/F/TAF in routine clinical practice, mental and physical health scores improved or remained stable over time and treatment satisfaction improved. Further studies are required to elucidate the clinical relevance of PRO tools and how they relate to QoL in people with HIV. Video abstract available for this article. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers NCT03580668 (Canada study) and NCT04009057 (Israel study); EudraCT trial identifier, EUPAS22185 (Europe study). Video abstract available for this article. Quality of life and treatment satisfaction in people with HIV switching to bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide: Pooled analysis from observational cohort studies - a video abstract.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.012
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfectious Diseases and TherapySame topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatmentFrench-language works237,207