Hepatitis C virus reinfection and superinfection among treated and untreated participants with recent infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The purpose of the study was to evaluate reinfection and superinfection during treatment for recent hepatitis C virus (HCV). The Australian Trial in Acute Hepatitis C (ATAHC) was a prospective study of the natural history and treatment of recent HCV. Reinfection and superinfection were defined by detection of infection with an HCV strain distinct from the primary strain (using reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction [RT-PCR] and subtype-specific nested RT-PCR assays) in the setting of spontaneous or treatment-induced viral suppression (one HCV RNA <10 IU/mL) or persistence (HCV RNA >10 IU/mL from enrollment to week 12). Among 163 patients, 111 were treated, 79% (88 of 111) had treatment-induced viral suppression, and 60% (67 of 111) achieved sustained virological response. Following treatment-induced viral suppression, recurrence was observed in 19% (17 of 88), including 12 with relapse and five with reinfection (4.7 cases per 100 person-years [PY], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9, 11.2). Among 52 untreated patients, 58% (30 of 52) had spontaneous viral suppression and recurrence was observed in 10% (3 of 30), including two with reinfection. Following reinfection, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels >1.5× the upper limit of normal were observed in 71% (5 of 7). Among 37 with persistence, superinfection was observed in 16% (3 of 19) of those treated and 17% (3 of 18) of those untreated. In adjusted analysis, reinfection/superinfection occurred more often in participants with poorer social functioning at enrollment and more often in those with ongoing injecting drug use (IDU). CONCLUSION: Reinfection and superinfection can occur during treatment of recent HCV and are associated with poor social functioning and ongoing IDU. ALT levels may be a useful clinical marker of reexposure.
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) | 0.000 | 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".