Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2026
Evaluating B/F/TAF at the first HIV-specialist appointment in antiretroviral naive persons living with HIV: the bifast study.
Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInitiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) immediately after HIV diagnosis is strongly recommended. We evaluated the efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of starting bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) at the first specialist appointment in treatment-naïve patients without prior laboratory results. MATERIALS AND
methodsA phase IV, open-label, non-randomized clinical trial was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Madrid between November 2020 and March 2022. -1 ART-naïve adults were assigned to one of two groups according to the availability of baseline laboratory results at their first HIV-specialist visit. Participants in Group 1 (FAST-ART) initiated ART immediately, without baseline data, whereas those in Group 2 (C-ART) started ART once baseline assessments—including plasma HIV-1 RNA, CD4⁺ T-cell count, and genotypic resistance testing— were available. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving plasma HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at week 48 in both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses. Secondary endpoints included time to viral suppression after ART initiation, time from HIV diagnosis to ART initiation, changes in CD4⁺ T-cell count, safety outcomes, and PROs measured with validated questionnaires (EQ-5D-5 L and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]).
resultsNinety-nine participants were enrolled (40 in Group 1; 59 in Group 2). At week 48, overall efficacy was 84.8% (ITT) and 95.5% (PP), with no significant differences between groups. Median time to viral suppression was 5.1 weeks in both groups. The median time from diagnosis to ART initiation was 2.4 weeks (IQR 1.9–3.3) in Group 1 versus 3.9 weeks (IQR 2.0–7.4) in Group 2 (p = 0.015). Only one Grade 1 adverse event led to discontinuation. Both groups showed significant improvements in health-related quality of life (HQoL) and reductions in anxiety and depression by week 48. Higher anxiety and depression scores at week 4 were associated with lower treatment efficacy at week 48.
conclusionsInitiating B/F/TAF at the first specialist visit without baseline laboratory data was feasible and associated with high rates of virologic suppression and a favorable safety profile in this cohort. This approach may improve HQoL, although timely psychological support remains important. Early anxiety and depression were associated to lower treatment efficacy. Overall, these findings support the potential of early ART initiation strategies with comprehensive care, but further studies in larger and more diverse populations are needed.
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.