Analysis of an Ebola virus disease survivor whose host and viral markers were predictive of death indicates the effectiveness of medical countermeasures and supportive care
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Ebola virus disease (EVD) is an often-fatal infection where the effectiveness of medical countermeasures is uncertain. During the West African outbreak (2013-2016), several patients were treated with different types of anti-viral therapies including monoclonal antibody-based cocktails that had the potential to neutralise Ebola virus (EBOV). However, at the time, the efficacy of these therapies was uncertain. Given the scale of the outbreak, several clinical phenotypes came to the forefront including the ability of the same virus to cause recrudescence in the same patient-perhaps through persisting in immune privileged sites. Several key questions remained including establishing if monoclonal antibody therapy was effective in humans with severe EVD, whether virus escape mutants were selected during treatment, and what is the potential mechanism(s) of persistence. This was made possible through longitudinal samples taken from a UK patient with EVD. METHODS: Several different sample types, plasma and cerebrospinal fluid, were collected and sequenced using Illumina-based RNAseq. Sequence reads were mapped both to EBOV and the human genome and differential gene expression analysis used to identify changes in the abundance of gene transcripts as infection progressed. Digital Cell Quantitation analysis was used to predict the immune phenotype in samples derived from blood. RESULTS: The findings were compared to equivalent data from West African patients. The study found that both virus and host markers were predictive of a fatal outcome. This suggested that the extensive supportive care, and most likely the application of the medical countermeasure ZMab (a monoclonal antibody cocktail), contributed to survival of the UK patient. The switch from progression to a 'fatal' outcome to a 'survival' outcome could be seen in both the viral and host markers. The UK patient also suffered a recrudescence infection 10 months after the initial infection. Analysis of the sequencing data indicated that the virus entered a period of reduced or minimal replication, rather than other potential mechanisms of persistence-such as defective interfering genomes. CONCLUSIONS: The data showed that comprehensive supportive care and the application of medical countermeasures are worth pursuing despite an initial unfavourable prognosis.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».