MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001467294 · doi:10.1002/jmv.21043

Development of a TaqMan assay for the six major genotypes of hepatitis C virus: Comparison with commercial assays

2007· article· en· W2001467294 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ronald E. Engle, Rodney S. Russell, Robert H. Purcell, Jens Bukh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Virology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsVirologyTaqManGenotypeBiologyVirusHepatitis a virusReal-time polymerase chain reactionGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A quantitative real-time PCR assay was developed that detects genomic RNA from reference strains representing the six major genotypes of hepatitis C virus (HCV) with equal sensitivity and accurately measured HCV RNA in JFH1 HCV-infected Huh7.5 cells. The method is indirectly calibrated to the first international (WHO 96/790) HCV standard preparation and has a linear dynamic range of 10(2.6)-10(6.5) IU/ml. In addition, the inter- and intra-assay precision were approximately 3% CV and <2% CV, respectively. Comparison with results obtained by commercially available HCV RNA Nucleic Acid Technology kits (Versant HCV RNA 3.0 b-DNA and Amplicor HCV Monitor), that also employ the WHO standard, allowed validation of the TaqMan assay against all major HCV genotypes. Both commercial methods detected HCV RNA over a wide dynamic range, but showed a consistent difference of about 0.3 log10 when evaluating samples of different HCV genotypes. The genome titers obtained with the three methods correlated with the infectivity titers previously determined for the HCV reference strains. TaqMan assays have become an essential tool to follow viral load in clinical samples and cell culture-based experiments and this technology offers significant advantages in linear dynamic range, sensitivity and customization.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.333 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations29
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical VirologySame topicHepatitis C virus researchFrench-language works237,207