MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1881862380 · doi:10.1177/135965350501002s02

Possible Ways Nucleoside Analogues Can Affect Mitochondrial Dna Content and Gene Expression during HIV Therapy

2005· article· en· W1881862380 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

VenueAntiviral Therapy · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsAIDS VancouverUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMitochondrial toxicityNucleoside Reverse Transcriptase InhibitorReverse transcriptaseMitochondrial DNAToxicityBiologyNucleoside analogueMitochondrionReverse-transcriptase inhibitorNucleosideMitochondrial respiratory chainVirologyAffect (linguistics)PharmacologyGeneHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Polymerase chain reactionMedicineGeneticsInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, research into nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI)-related mitochondrial (mt) toxicity in HIV therapy has led to conflicting results and many unanswered questions regarding the molecular mechanisms that lead to such toxicity. From the early hypothesis that inhibition of the human mt polymerase gamma by NRTls was responsible for the drugs' mt toxicity, an increasingly complex picture is emerging that probably involves multiple mt pathways. Results have been presented suggesting that NRTIs affect not only mtDNA but also mtRNA, nucleotide phosphorylation and the mt respiratory chain. Based on the current level of knowledge, this overview addresses some of the potential mechanisms through which NRTIs could affect mitochondria and ultimately cause the toxicity symptoms observed in HIV patients receiving NRTI-containing antiretroviral therapy.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.224 · 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