Serological immunity to adenovirus serotype 5 is not associated with risk of HIV infection: a case–control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: adenoviruses are among the most promising vectors for the development of an HIV vaccine. The results of the phase IIB study of the adenovirus serotype 5-based Merck Trivalent HIV vaccine have raised the concern that serological immunity to adenovirus serotype 5 (Ad5) could be linked to HIV acquisition risk in high-risk individuals. We examined the association between adenovirus serostatus and the rate of incident HIV infection in populations at elevated risk of HIV acquisition. METHODS: we performed a nested case-control study of Ad5 serostatus among 299 HIV-infected and 590 matched HIV-uninfected persons participating in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS) and in HPTN 039, a study of herpes simplex virus 2 suppression among adults in the United States, South America, and Africa. Appropriate HIV cases and controls were identified in each cohort, and Ad5-neutralizing antibody titers were compared in these two groups. RESULTS: in MACS and HPTN 039, the relative risks of incident HIV infection among Ad5-seropositive vs. Ad5-seronegative individuals were 1.1 (95% confidence interval 0.8-1.5, P = 0.57) and 1.0 (95% confidence interval 0.4-2.3, P = 0.99), respectively. HIV-1 acquisition rates did not vary significantly by Ad5-neutralizing antibody titer. CONCLUSION: the presence of Ad5-neutralizing antibodies is not linked to the risk of HIV acquisition among populations at elevated risk of HIV infection.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".