MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007819361 · doi:10.1089/aid.2007.0080

<i>Short Communication:</i> Identification of a Novel HIV Type 1 Subtype H/J Recombinant in Canada with Discordant HIV Viral Load (RNA) Values in Three Different Commercial Assays

2007· article· en· W2007819361 on OpenAlexaffabout
John E. Kim, Brenda Beckthold, Zhaoxia Chen, Jennifer Mihowich, L Malloch, M. John Gill

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Research and Human Retroviruses · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Hip and Knee ClinicPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersPublic Health Agency
KeywordsVirologyRecombinant DNAViral loadBiologyLentivirusGroup-specific antigenDNA sequencingGeneHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Phylogenetic treeGenetic diversityRNAViral diseaseGeneticsMedicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of HIV-1 non-B subtypes is increasing worldwide. This poses challenges to commercial diagnostic and viral load (RNA) monitoring tests that are predominantly based on HIV-1 subtype B strains. Based on phylogenetic analysis of the gag, pol, and env gene regions, we describe the first HIV-1 H/J recombinant in Canada that presented divergent viral load values. DNA sequence analysis of the gag gene region further revealed that genetic diversity between this H/J recombinant and the primers and probes used in the bio-Merieux Nuclisens HIV-1 QT (Nuclisens) and Roche Amplicor Monitor HIV-1, v1.5 (Monitor) viral RNA assays can erroneously lead to undetectable viral load values. This observation appears to be more problematic in the Nuclisens assay. In light of increasing genetic diversity in HIV worldwide we recommend that DNA sequencing of HIV, especially in the gag gene region targeted by primers and probes used in molecular diagnostic and viral load tests, be incorporated into clinical monitoring practices.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations23
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIDS Research and Human RetrovirusesSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207