Improved Detection of CXCR4-Using HIV by V3 Genotyping: Application of Population-Based and “Deep” Sequencing to Plasma RNA and Proviral DNA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tropism testing should rule out CXCR4-using HIV before treatment with CCR5 antagonists. Currently, the recombinant phenotypic Trofile assay (Monogram) is most widely utilized; however, genotypic tests may represent alternative methods. METHODS: Independent triplicate amplifications of the HIV gp120 V3 region were made from either plasma HIV RNA or proviral DNA. These underwent standard, population-based sequencing with an ABI3730 (RNA n = 63; DNA n = 40), or "deep" sequencing with a Roche/454 Genome Sequencer-FLX (RNA n = 12; DNA n = 12). Position-specific scoring matrices (PSSMX4/R5) (-6.96 cutoff) and geno2pheno[coreceptor] (5% false-positive rate) inferred tropism from V3 sequence. These methods were then independently validated with a separate, blinded dataset (n = 278) of screening samples from the maraviroc MOTIVATE trials. RESULTS: Standard sequencing of HIV RNA with PSSM yielded 69% sensitivity and 91% specificity, relative to Trofile. The validation dataset gave 75% sensitivity and 83% specificity. Proviral DNA plus PSSM gave 77% sensitivity and 71% specificity. "Deep" sequencing of HIV RNA detected >2% inferred-CXCR4-using virus in 8/8 samples called non-R5 by Trofile, and <2% in 4/4 samples called R5. CONCLUSIONS: Triplicate analyses of V3 standard sequence data detect greater proportions of CXCR4-using samples than previously achieved. Sequencing proviral DNA and "deep" V3 sequencing may also be useful tools for assessing tropism.
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 | 0.001 | 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".