English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Methods Each study was double-blind and randomized; all pts received a background ART regimen (see table in Figure 1). Primary results have been presented for each study. Protocol (P) 004 in treatment-naive pts was a dose-ranging study of RAL vs. efavirenz (EFV) until week 48 after which all pts in RAL groups received 400 mg BID. BENCHMRK-1 and -2 were identical Phase III studies using RAL at 400 mg BID vs. placebo (PBO) in highly treatment-experienced pts with multi-drug resistant virus failing other therapies. Each of the three studies showed potent clinical efficacy for RAL-treated pts. In this analysis, P004 results are shown for all RAL dose groups combined at week 96, and BENCHMRK-1 and -2 results are shown combined at week 48. Non-B subtypes were combined for the analyses due to small numbers of each specific non-B subtype.

Raltegravir clinical efficacy against B subtype and non-B subtype HIV-1 is similar