Targeting frameshifting in the human immunodeficiency virus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: HIV-1 uses a programmed –1 ribosomal frameshift to generate Gag-Pol, the precursor of its enzymes, when its full-length mRNA is translated by the ribosomes of the infected cells. This change in the reading frame occurs at a so-called slippery sequence that is followed by a specific secondary structure, the frameshift stimulatory signal. This signal controls the frameshift efficiency. The synthesis of HIV-1 enzymes is critical for virus replication and therefore, the –1 ribosomal frameshift could be the target of novel antiviral drugs. AREAS COVERED: Various approaches were used to select drugs interfering with the –1 frameshift of HIV-1. These include the selection and modification of chemical compounds that specifically bind to the frameshift stimulatory signal, the use of antisense oligonucleotides targeting this signal and the selection of compounds that modulate HIV-1 frameshift, by using bicistronic reporters where the expression of the second cistron depends upon HIV-1 frameshift. EXPERT OPINION: The most promising approach is the selection and modification of compounds specifically targeting the HIV-1 frameshift stimulatory signal. The use of antisense oligonucleotides binding to the frameshift stimulatory signal is still questionable. The use of bicistronic reporters preferentially selects compounds that modulate the frameshift by targeting the ribosomes, which is less promising.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".