MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974522662 · doi:10.1097/coh.0b013e32835005d9

Whey acidic proteins (WAPs)

2012· review· en· W1974522662 on OpenAlexaff
James L. Reading, Adrienne F. A. Meyers, Annapurna Vyakarnam

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInnate immune systemImmunityMicrobicideImmunologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Immune systemTransmission (telecommunications)Acquired immune systemBiologyInterferonMedicineVirologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss how whey acidic proteins (WAPs), a new class of immunomodulatory soluble mediators, impact innate immunity to HIV infection. RECENT FINDINGS: Innate immunity to HIV infection is increasingly being recognized as critical in determining initial virus transmission and dissemination and may, therefore, be exploited in vaccine and microbicide intervention strategies to combat HIV infection. Several important innate immune mediators have recently been shown to regulate HIV infection in vitro and are, thus, implicated in in vivo immunity to the virus. These include soluble mediators, such as type I interferon, the defensins and more recently WAPs. Recent evidence is discussed, which show that WAPs are pleiotropic soluble mediators that may impact the course of HIV infection in two ways: as regulators of HIV replication and as regulators of innate and adaptive immunity. SUMMARY: A better understanding of host factors that regulate HIV transmission is essential in the development of novel therapeutic strategies. This review focuses on recent findings that highlight the HIV regulatory and anti-inflammatory function of WAPs and assesses their potential to be exploited as novel therapeutics.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in HIV and AIDSSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207