Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28538284›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in HIV and AIDS2017

The ADVANCE study: a groundbreaking trial to evaluate a candidate universal antiretroviral regimen.

Willem D F Venter, Polly Clayden, Celicia Serenata, OPTIMIZE Consortium

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in HIV and AIDS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Why a universal antiretroviral regimen?Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2017
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Willem D F VenteraWits Reproductive Health and HIV Institute, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa bHIV i-Base, London, UK.
Polly Clayden
Celicia Serenata
OPTIMIZE Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewCurrent WHO-recommended first-line therapy in low-income and middle-income countries has been very successful in saving millions of lives but still has toxicity concerns and a low barrier to resistance. RECENT

findingsTwo candidate antiretrovirals may substantially transform first-line therapy in low-income and middle-income countries, yielding a safer, more robust and cheaper regimen. Tenofovir alafenamide carries toxicity and cost benefits over tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. Dolutegravir could replace efavirenz, with substantial toxicity, resistance and cost benefits. However, these drugs are currently not manufactured together in developed countries, for commercial reasons. SUMMARY: We describe a large randomized controlled study testing a combination of these candidate antiretrovirals against the current first-line recommendation that commenced recruitment in early 2017. We justify the study design and discuss how we will deal with complex issues such as tuberculosis and pregnancy.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicAdenineAnti-HIV AgentsDrug CombinationsHIV InfectionsHumansTenofovirAdenineAnti-HIV AgentsDrug CombinationsTenofovir

Identifiers

PMID28538284
PMCPMC5459583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.