Effects of cidofovir on cell death and replication of feline herpesvirus-1 in cultured feline corneal epithelial cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of cidofovir on viability of feline corneal epithelial (FCE) cells, replication of feline herpesvirus (FHV)-1, and virus-induced cytopathic changes. SAMPLE POPULATION: Healthy eyes from 14 recently euthanatized cats. PROCEDURE: Cidofovir at concentrations ranging from 0.05 to 0.000005 mg/mL was added to primary cultures of FCE cells, and cytopathic changes and effects on cell proliferation and cell viability were determined during the subsequent 48 hours. Efficacy of cidofovir (0.02 and 0.05 mg/mL) to prevent in vitro infection of FCE cells with FHV-1 was determined during 72 hours of culture by assessing viral cytopathic effects and viral titers. RESULTS: Cidofovir at concentrations of 0.05, 0.005, and 0.0005 mg/mL significantly reduced mean viable cell counts, and cidofovir at a concentration of 0.05 mg/mL significantly reduced the percentage viability of cultured FCE cells. Minimal cytopathic changes were observed at concentrations of 0.02 and 0.05 mg of cidofovir/mL. Cidofovir at concentrations of 0.05 and 0.02 mg/mL abrogated the cytopathic effects attributable to FHV-1 infection and reduced viral titers from > or =10(14) TCID(50)/mL to < or =10(3.5) TCID50/mL. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Cidofovir in vitro was highly efficacious against FHV-1 infection of a primary culture of FCE cells but had cytostatic effects on cultured cells.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 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".