Trofile HIV co-receptor usage assay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The introduction of CCR5 antagonists increases the options available for constructing therapeutic drug regimens for HIV-positive patients. However, as these drugs do not inhibit HIV variants that use the CXCR4 co-receptor, a pretreatment test is required to determine accurately HIV co-receptor usage (tropism) before initiating CCR5 antagonist-based therapy. OBJECTIVE/METHOD: To discuss the Monogram Trofile assay as a diagnostic tool for determining HIV tropism by critically reviewing reported literature and available data. CONCLUSIONS: Monogram Trofile has become, largely by default, the de facto standard for HIV tropism assay. However, there is significant room for improvement in the speed, cost and availability of the test. Furthermore, the test is not quantitative, requires high-input HIV RNA viral loads, and produces results that are less biologically stable than expected. These technical considerations may limit the use of CCR5 antagonists in therapy. Nevertheless, this test is likely to remain the most widely used tropism diagnostic for the short term. We expect that a more practical and possibly more accurate method for measuring HIV tropism can be developed.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.020 | 0.045 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".