A cross-sectional study of SEN virus in liver transplant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new DNA virus, referred to as SEN virus (SEN V), has been isolated and is associated with blood-product transfusion and possibly Non A to Non E hepatitis. We performed a cross-sectional analysis of SEN V in liver transplant recipients at our center. Polymerase chain reaction was used to test for 2 genotypes of SEN V (SEN V:C/H and SEN V:D) in 58 unselected patients. Comparisons were made between SEN V--positive and SEN V--negative groups in terms of age, time posttransplantation, indications for transplantation, serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels, and cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr virus status. Thirty of 58 transplant recipients (51.7%) were SEN V positive; 15.5% were positive for SEN V:C/H, 24.1% for SEN:D, and 12.1% for both strains. No significant differences were found based on primary indication for transplantation, including hepatitis C virus (HCV). Of the 14 of 21 patients with HCV seropositivity and HCV reinfection, 79% were positive for SEN V (P =.02). There was no difference in the proportion of patients with abnormal serum ALT and/or AST levels. A trend for the SEN V--positive group to have a greater mean ALT level (82 v 41 U/L; P =.067) was attributable to the subgroup with HCV recurrence because there was no difference in mean ALT levels (34.9 v 34.5 U/L; P =.968) in non--HCV-infected transplant recipients. Even in the subgroup (n = 14) with recurrent HCV, there was no statistically significant difference in mean ALT levels (140 v 105 U/L; P =.665). Age and cytomegalovirus or Epstein-Barr virus status were not significantly different between the 2 groups, but a significant difference in posttransplantation time was noted (16.8 v 32 months; P =.021). We conclude that SEN V is common among liver transplant recipients but does not appear to cause graft dysfunction as an isolated agent. There is a suggestion that SEN V may be associated with HCV recurrence, but we did not detect biochemical differences attributable to SEN V.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".