Factors Affecting Template Usage in the Development of K65R Resistance in Subtype C Variants of HIV Type-1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We have shown that the K65R resistance mutation in HIV type-1 (HIV-1) reverse transcriptase (RT) is selected more rapidly in subtype C than subtype B HIV-1 in biochemical, cell culture and clinical studies. Template-usage experiments demonstrated that subtype C nucleotide coding sequences caused RT to preferentially pause, leading to K65R acquisition. This new study now further establishes the basis for differential occurrence of both K65R and thymidine analogue mutations (TAMs) between subtypes. METHODS: Gel-based nucleotide extension assays were used to study the homopolymeric sequence surrounding K65. RESULTS: When positive double-stranded DNA synthesis was evaluated from a negative single-stranded DNA template, pausing at the 67 region, which is linked to occurrence of TAMs, was alleviated with both subtype B and C templates at high dCTP concentrations, but this alleviation was more pronounced with the subtype C template. By contrast, pausing at the 65 region on the subtype C but not subtype B template always occurred and was not alleviated at high levels of nucleotide triphosphates or by other means. Furthermore, templates containing repeats of the homopolymeric sequence spanning codons 64-66 of pol showed corresponding pausing repeats at the 65 region with the subtype C template only. Inverted RNA and DNA templates both displayed pausing at position K65 for the subtype C template and a ladder of pausing events culminating at codon 67 for the subtype B templates. CONCLUSIONS: These results further establish a mechanistic basis for the exclusion of both K65R and TAMs on single templates as well as the preferential acquisition of K65R in subtype C viruses.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".