Action of Inhibitors on Accumulation of Processed Hepatitis Delta Virus RNAs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hepatitis delta virus (HDV) replication involves processing and accumulation of three RNA species: the genome, its exact complement (the antigenome), and a polyadenylated mRNA that acts as a template for the small delta antigen (deltaAg), the only protein of HDV and essential for genome replication. In a recently reported experimental system, addition of tetracycline induced synthesis of a DNA-directed source of deltaAg, producing within 24 h a significant increase in accumulation of newly transcribed and processed HDV RNAs. This induction was used here to study the action of various inhibitors on accumulation. For example, potent and HDV-specific inhibition, in the absence of detected host toxicity, could be obtained with ribavirin, mycophenolic acid, and viramidine. An interpretation is that these inhibitors reduced the available GTP pool, leading to a specific inhibition of the synthesis and accumulation of HDV RNA-directed RNA species. In contrast, no inhibition was observed with L-FMAU (2'-fluoro-5-methyl-beta-L-arabinofuranosyl-uridine), alpha interferon, or pegylated alpha interferon. After modifications to the experimental system, it was also possible to examine the effects of three known host RNA polymerase inhibitors on HDV genome replication: amanitin, 5,6-dichloro-1-beta-D-ribofuranosylbenzimidazole (DRB), and actinomycin. Of most interest, amanitin at low doses blocked accumulation of HDV RNA-directed mRNA but had less effect on HDV genomic and antigenomic RNAs. Additional experiments indicated that this apparent resistance to amanitin inhibition of genomic and antigenomic RNA relative to mRNA may not reflect a difference in the transcribing polymerase but rather relative differences in the processing and stabilization of nascent RNA transcripts.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".