Viral Shedding and Susceptibility to Oseltamivir in Hospitalized Immunocompromised Patients with Influenza in the Influenza Resistance Information Study (IRIS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised patients are at greater risk of complicated influenza and may be more likely to develop antiviral resistance. This observational substudy of the Influenza Resistance Information Study (NCT00884117) aimed to study antiviral resistance in immunocompromised patients with influenza and characterize its effect on clinical and virological outcomes. METHODS: Eligible immunocompromised patients were aged ≥1 year with a local rapid diagnostic or PCR test positive for influenza ≤96 h after diagnosis and with influenza symptoms. Nasal and throat swabs were taken for RT-PCR analysis on day 1 and then every 3 days until patients were virus-free. Resistance was assessed by mutation-specific RT-PCR, phenotypic susceptibility analysis and Sanger sequencing. RESULTS: Of 42 patients enrolled, 29 (69%) were influenza-positive (RT-PCR) on day 1: 18 adults and 11 children aged 1-12 years. Six patients were severely immunocompromised. On days 3, 6 and 9, most patients tested (18/24, 9/15 and 6/9, respectively) had not cleared the virus. Two of five patients assessed after day 9 continued shedding virus until day 15. H1N1pdm09 viruses harbouring H275Y mutations were detected in post-baseline samples from four patients (aged 52-61 years), one of whom had prolonged viral shedding. No genotypic antiviral resistance was detected in the other 20 treated patients (prevalence of resistance, 17%). Correlation between level of immune compromise and resistance or outcomes could not be assessed. Ten patients (seven influenza-positive) were admitted to intensive care and three died. CONCLUSIONS: In these patients with mild/moderate immunocompromise, emergence of oseltamivir-resistant viruses was not common. Severity of influenza symptoms ranged from mild to moderate, but correlation with level of compromise could not be determined.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".