Increase in Genogroup II.4 Norovirus Host Spectrum by CagA-Positive Helicobacter pylori Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Noroviruses (NoVs) represent a considerable public health burden. Despite their enormous genetic diversity, most outbreaks are due to the single GII.4 genotype, but the reasons for this are poorly understood. NoVs use histo-blood group antigens (HBGAs) as attachment factors. Since HBGAs are present in saliva, binding of strains to saliva is commonly used as a surrogate for recognition of the gut surface by specific strains, although the relationship between saliva and gut tissue expression of HBGAs is not well defined. METHODS: The presence of fucosylated HBGAs in saliva and stomach biopsy specimens, as well as that of genogroup I.1 and genogroup II.4 virus-like particles, were compared in a series of 109 donors from Portugal. RESULTS: An overall good concordance between HBGA expression in saliva and stomach surface mucosa was observed. However, unexpected mucosal expression of α(1,2)fucosylated epitopes in nonsecretor individuals was frequently detected, allowing for GII.4 attachment. Although all individuals were infected with Helicobacter pylori, abnormal expression of α(1,2)fucosylated motifs and binding of GII.4 virus-like particles in nonsecretors' mucosa were associated with positivity for the H. pylori CagA virulence factor. CONCLUSIONS: Infection by CagA-positive H. pylori induces expression of GII.4 attachment factors in nonsecretors' mucosa, expanding the host range of these strains and thereby possibly contributing to their epidemiological dominance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".