MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038196376 · doi:10.1517/14728222.5.4.443

Targeting HIV-1 integrase

2001· article· en· W2038196376 on OpenAlexaff
Jocelyn Yelle, Gilles Sauvé, Khampoune Sayasith

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Therapeutic Targets · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsCegep de Saint HyacintheUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntegraseIntegrase inhibitorReverse transcriptaseVirologyBiologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)VirusProteaseComputational biologyEnzymeGeneticsAntiretroviral therapyRNAViral loadGeneBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human immunodeficiency virus Type 1 (HIV-1) integrase is an essential enzyme for the obligatory integration of the viral DNA into the infected cell chromosome. As no cellular homologue of HIV integrase has been identified, this unique HIV-1 enzyme is an attractive target for the development of new therapeutics. Treatment of HIV-1 infection and AIDS currently consists of the use of combinations of HIV-1 inhibitors directed against reverse transcriptase (RT) and protease. However, their numerous side effects and the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants limit greatly their use in many AIDS patients. In principle, inhibitors of the HIV-1 integrase should be relatively non-toxic and provide additional benefits for AIDS chemotherapy. There have been many major advances in our understanding of the molecular mechanism of the integration reaction, although some critical aspects remain obscure. Several classes of compounds have been screened and further scrutinised for their inhibitory properties against the HIV integrase; however, there are currently no useful inhibitors available clinically for the treatment of AIDS patients. This review describes the current knowledge of the biological functions of the HIV-1 integrase and reports the major classes of integrase inhibitors identified to date.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.285 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Therapeutic TargetsSame topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatmentFrench-language works237,207