Liver Transplantation-Associated de novo Hepatitis B Virus Infection: Application of Molecular Evolutionary Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: De novo hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection after liver transplantation has recently been reported to be associated with donors without serum hepatitis B surface antigen (HbsAg) but with hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc). We elucidate the source of de novo HBV infection after liver transplantation by molecular evolutionary analysis. METHODS: The serum sample was obtained from a recipient who underwent living related liver transplantation. He was negative for all HBV-related serum markers before the transplantation. The recipient became seropositive for HBsAg at 6 months after transplantation. The liver tissue was obtained from a donor who was seronegative for HBsAg, but positive for anti-HBs and anti-HBc. RESULTS: HBV DNA was detected from the serum and liver tissue in a recipient and donor, respectively. A total of 5 clones each of small-S gene of HBV from the donor and recipient were sequenced. A phylogenetic tree analysis based on small-S gene revealed that all isolates derived from the recipient and donor were clustered together within a close range of evolutionary distances. These results indicated that HBV was transmitted by the liver graft from the donor. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular evolutionary analysis can be adopted for the study of the transmission route of viral infection via organ transplantation.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".