Re‐evaluation of hepatitis B virus clinical phases by systems biology identifies unappreciated roles for the innate immune response and B cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: To identify immunological mechanisms that govern distinct clinical phases of a chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection-immune tolerant (IT), immune active (IA), inactive carrier (IC), and hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-negative (ENEG) hepatitis phases-we performed a systems biology study. Serum samples from untreated chronic HBV patients (n = 71) were used for multiplex cytokine measurements, quantitative hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), HBeAg levels, HBV genotype, and mutant analysis. Leukocytes were phenotyped using multicolor flow cytometry, and whole-blood transcriptome profiles were generated. The latter were compared with liver biopsy transcriptomes from IA (n = 16) and IT (n = 3) patients. HBV viral load as well as HBeAg and HBsAg levels (P < 0.001), but not leukocyte composition, differed significantly between distinct phases. Serum macrophage chemotactic protein 1, interleukin-12p40, interferon (IFN)-gamma-inducible protein 10, and macrophage inflammatory protein 1 beta levels were different between two or more clinical phases (P < 0.05). Comparison of blood transcriptomes identified 64 differentially expressed genes. The gene signature distinguishing IA from IT and IC patients was predominantly composed of highly up-regulated immunoglobulin-encoding genes. Modular repertoire analysis using gene sets clustered according to similar expression patterns corroborated the abundant expression of B-cell function-related genes in IA patients and pointed toward increased (ISG) transcript levels in IT patients, compared to subsequent phases. Natural killer cell activities were clustered in clinical phases with biochemical liver damage (IA and ENEG phases), whereas T-cell activities were higher in all phases, compared to IT patients. B-cell-related transcripts proved to be higher in biopsies from IA versus IT patients. CONCLUSION: HBV clinical phases are characterized by distinct blood gene signatures. Innate IFN and B-cell responses are highly active during the IT and IA phases, respectively. This suggests that the presumed immune tolerance in chronic HBV infections needs to be redefined.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".