AR-quiver approach to affine canonical basis elements

AbstractThis is the continuation of [Y. Li, Affine quivers of type A˜n and canonical bases, math.QA/0501175]. We describe the affine canonical basis elements in the case when the affine quiver has arbitrary orientation. This generalizes the description in [G. Lusztig, Affine quivers and canonical bases, Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. 76 (1992) 111–163]

Moving Away from Ritonavir, Abacavir, Tenofovir, and Efavirenz (RATE) - Agents That Concern Prescribers and Patients: A Feasibility Study and Call for a Trial

<div><p>Objectives</p><p>Regimens sparing RATE (ritonavir, abacavir, tenofovir, efavirienz) agents might have better long-term safety. We conducted a feasibility exercise to assess the potential for a randomised trial evaluating RATE-sparing regimens.</p><p>Design</p><p>Observational.</p><p>Methods</p><p>We first calculated RATE-sparing options available to an average patient receiving RATE agents. We reviewed treatment history and all resistance assays from patients attending the St. Vincent’s Hospital (Sydney) clinic and receiving ≥2 RATE agents (n = 120). A viable RATE-sparing regimen with 2 or 3 fully-active agents was constructed from the following six ‘safer’ agents: rilpivirine or etravirine; atazanavir; raltegravir; maraviroc; and lamivudine. Activity for each drug was predicted as 1 (full-activity), 0.5 or 0 (no activity) using the Stanford mutation database. The utility of maraviroc was calculated assuming both maraviroc activity and inactivity where unknown. The analysis was restricted to regimens for which supporting evidence was identified in the literature or conference proceedings. Finally, we calculated the proportion of patients in the nationally representative Australian HIV Observational Database (AHOD) cohort receiving ≥2 RATE agents (n = 1473) to measure the potential population-level uptake of RATE-sparing agents.</p><p>Results</p><p>Assuming full maraviroc activity, 117(97.5%) and 107(89.2%) individuals had at least one option with 2 or 3 active RATE-sparing agents, respectively. Assuming no maraviroc activity this decreased to 113(94.2%) and 104(86.7%), respectively. In AHOD, 837(56.8%) patients were receiving ≥2 RATE agents.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>Feasible treatment switch options sparing RATE agents exist for the majority of patients. Understanding the pros and cons of switching stable patients onto new RATE-sparing regimens requires evidence derived from randomised controlled trials.</p></div

Number of treatment options under various scenarios in the Hospital database.

<p>Number of treatment options under various scenarios in the Hospital database.</p

Proposed trial for evaluating RATE-sparing options.

<p>Proposed trial for evaluating RATE-sparing options.</p

Patient characteristics in the Hospital Database (n = 120).

<p>*defined as high-level resistance to at least one agent from the class.</p><p>**defined as follows: First-line: no known history of resistance to any agent, and maximum change of 1 class of drugs. Second-line: history of resistance to any agent ever or major substitutions of >1 class.</p><p>***Test unsuccessful counted as unknown in the analyses.</p><p>****intergrase gene mutations had not been tested, therefore raltegravir assumed to be 1 in all patients. See text for maraviroc activity assumptions.</p><p>NOTE: ABC  =  abacavir, TDF  =  Tenofovir, 3TC  =  lamivudine, FTC  =  emtricitabine, ATV/r  =  ritonavir boosted atazanavir, DRV/r  =  ritonavir boosted darunanavir, RAL  =  raltegravir.</p

Impact of health-related quality of life and social functioning on treatment uptake, adherence and SVR.

<p>Impact of health-related quality of life and social functioning on treatment uptake, adherence and SVR.</p

Factors associated with longitudinal social functioning score (<i>lower</i> score corresponds to <i>higher</i> functioning), (n = 146).

<p>Factors associated with longitudinal social functioning score (<i>lower</i> score corresponds to <i>higher</i> functioning), (n = 146).</p

Recent HCV treatment uptake, adherence and sustained virological response by social functioning score.

<p>(Opiate Treatment Index score 0–9, 10–14, ≥15) at baseline.</p

Characteristics of participants in Australian Trial in Acute Hepatitis C, by treatment group and HCV RNA status at baseline.

<p>Characteristics of participants in Australian Trial in Acute Hepatitis C, by treatment group and HCV RNA status at baseline.</p

Baseline plasma IP-10 according to virological responses in genotype 1 patients only.

<p>Baseline IP-10 values are shown in genotype 1 patients who did and did not achieve: a) RVR b) EVR c) ETR and d) SVR. IP-10 levels were compared using the student’s t-test with Welch’s correction for unequal variances as appropriate. RVR rapid virological response; EVR early virological response; ETR end of treatment response; SVR sustained virological response.</p