MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1614429408

BK virus infection in transplant recipients: clinical manifestations, treatment options and the immune response.

2012· article· en· W1614429408 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPolyomavirus and related diseases
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBK virusAsymptomaticImmunologyPopulationImmune systemImmunosuppressionPolyomavirus InfectionsNephropathyTransplantationKidney transplantationInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polyomavirus BK (BKV) is ubiquitously present amongst the general population establishing a latent, seemingly asymptomatic infection in immunocompetent individuals. In transplant recipients, however, BKV reactivation is common and can lead to distinctive pathological entities in different patient groups: in renal transplant (RT) recipients, it is associated with nephropathy (BKVN) and ureteral stenosis, and in haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients with haemorrhagic cystitis (HC). Furthermore, BKV employs several potentially oncogenic mechanisms to promote its replication in cells and has been inconsistently linked to the development of malignancies. BKVN is currently a major cause of allograft failure in RT recipients. HC causes prolonged hospital stay and increased mortality in HSCT recipients. Despite its discovery more than 40 years ago, few advances have been made with regard to therapeutic strategies. Current therapies aim to restore the impaired immune response, e.g. by lowering immunosuppressive agents in RT recipients. However, this is a double-edged sword since it also increases the chance of rejection. Therefore, more specific and effective treatment strategies are urgently needed. Here, we will review the current knowledge on the structure and lifecycle of BKV, characteristics of the BKV-specific immune response, its clinical manifestations and the strengths and limitations of available treatments Polyomavirus BK (BKV) is ubiquitously present amongst the general population establishing a latent, seemingly asymptomatic infection in immunocompetent individuals. In transplant recipients, however, BKV reactivation is common and can lead to distinctive pathological entities in different patient groups: in renal transplant (RT) recipients, it is associated with nephropathy (BKVN) and ureteral stenosis, and in haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients with haemorrhagic cystitis (HC). Furthermore, BKV employs several potentially oncogenic mechanisms to promote its replication in cells and has been inconsistently linked to the development of malignancies. BKVN is currently a major cause of allograft failure in RT recipients. HC causes prolonged hospital stay and increased mortality in HSCT recipients. Despite its discovery more than 40 years ago, few advances have been made with regard to therapeutic strategies. Current therapies aim to restore the impaired immune response, e.g. by lowering immunosuppressive agents in RT recipients. However, this is a double-edged sword since it also increases the chance of rejection. Therefore, more specific and effective treatment strategies are urgently needed. Here, we will review the current knowledge on the structure and lifecycle of BKV, characteristics of the BKV-specific immune response, its clinical manifestations and the strengths and limitations of available treatments methods.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it