MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056893015 · doi:10.7448/ias.17.4.19738

HIV‐1 group O integrase displays lower susceptibility to raltegravir and has a different mutational pathway for resistance than HIV‐1 group M

2014· article· en· W2056893015 on OpenAlexaff
Agnès Depatureaux, Thibault Mésplède, Peter K. Quashie, Maureen Oliveira, Daniela Moïsi, Bluma Brenner, Mark A. Wainberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International AIDS Society · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntegraseRaltegravirVirologyIntegrasesIntegrase inhibitorBiologyVirusGeneticsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Viral loadAntiretroviral therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: HIV-1 group O (HIV-O) is a rare HIV-1 variant characterized by a high number of polymorphisms, especially in the integrase gene, e.g. positions L74I, S153A, G163Q and T206S. As HIV-O integrase enzymes have not previously been studied, our aim was to assess the impact of HIV-O integrase polymorphisms on susceptibility to integrase inhibitors and emergence of resistance associated mutations. Viruses and Methods: We cloned and purified integrase proteins from each of HIV-1 Group O clades A (HIV-O/A) and B (HIV-O/B), a HIV-O divergent strain (HIV-O/Div), and HIV-1 group M (subtype B, HIV-M/B) and characterized these enzymes for susceptibility to integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) in cell-free assays and in tissue culture, in the absence or presence of varying concentrations of several INSTIs. The inhibition constant (Ki) and IC50 were calculated and compared for HIV-M and HIV-O integrases. Selections for resistance-related mutations were performed using cord blood mononuclear cells and increasing concentration of INSTIs. RESULTS: HIV-O integrase and viruses were more susceptible to raltegravir (RAL) in competitive inhibition assays and in tissue culture than were HIV-M enzymes and viruses, respectively. During selection, we observed different pathways of resistance depending on the drug and clade. Mutations selected in HIV-O can be classified as follows: (1) mutations described for HIV-M such as T97A, Q148R, V151A/I (RAL), T66I, E92Q, E157Q (EVG) and M50I, R263K (DTG) and (2) signature mutations for HIV-O (i.e. not described in HIV-M) F121C (HIV-O/B for RAL), V75I (HIV-O/A for RAL) and S153V (HIV-O/A for DTG). Only the HIV-O/Div selected the Q148R mutation for RAL and R263K+M50I for DTG, as previously described for HIV-M. None of the HIV-O viruses selected either N155H or Y143C. The selection of the specific S153V mutation could be explained at the nucleotide level: HIV-O at this position contains an alanine and substitution of alanine to valine (153AGGC→153VGTC) is easier than substitution of alanine to tyrosine (153AGGC→153YTAC), with only a transversion needed instead of one transition plus one transversion. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of susceptibility and resistance in vitro to INSTIs for HIV-O. Our study confirmed the impact of HIV-O polymorphism, on susceptibility to INSTIs and the emergence of resistance mutations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the International AIDS SocietySame topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatmentFrench-language works237,207