ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2021
2021 update to HIV-TRePS: a highly flexible and accurate system for the prediction of treatment response from incomplete baseline information in different healthcare settings.
Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The use of artificial intelligence in sexual and reproductive health: a comprehensive scoping review.npj women's health · 2025Article
- Risk factors for surgical site infection after general surgery in HIV-infected patients: a retrospective study.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Need assessment for HIV drug resistance testing and landscape of current and future technologies in low- and middle-income countries.PLOS global public health · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWith the goal of facilitating the use of HIV-TRePS to optimize therapy in settings with limited healthcare resources, we aimed to develop computational models to predict treatment responses accurately in the absence of commonly used baseline data.
methodsTwelve sets of random forest models were trained using very large, global datasets to predict either the probability of virological response (classifier models) or the absolute change in viral load in response to a new regimen (absolute models) following virological failure. Two 'standard' models were developed with all baseline variables present and 10 others developed without HIV genotype, time on therapy, CD4 count or any combination of the above.
resultsThe standard classifier models achieved an AUC of 0.89 in cross-validation and independent testing. Models with missing variables achieved AUC values of 0.78-0.90. The standard absolute models made predictions that correlated significantly with observed changes in viral load with a mean absolute error of 0.65 log10 copies HIV RNA/mL in cross-validation and 0.69 log10 copies HIV RNA/mL in independent testing. Models with missing variables achieved values of 0.65-0.75 log10 copies HIV RNA/mL. All models identified alternative regimens that were predicted to be effective for the vast majority of cases where the new regimen prescribed in the clinic failed. All models were significantly better predictors of treatment response than genotyping with rules-based interpretation.
conclusionsThese latest models that predict treatment responses accurately, even when a number of baseline variables are not available, are a major advance with greatly enhanced potential benefit, particularly in resource-limited settings. The only obstacle to realizing this potential is the willingness of healthcare professions to use the system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.