Virus and Antibody Dynamics in Acute West Nile Virus Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The dynamics of the early stages of West Nile virus (WNV) infection can be assessed by follow-up studies of viremic blood donors. METHODS: A total of 245 donors with WNV viremia were followed up weekly for 4 weeks and then monthly for up to 6 additional months or until seroconversion. Plasma samples were tested for WNV RNA by transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) and for WNV-specific IgM and IgG antibodies. RNA persistence was investigated by 6 replicate TMA tests; samples that were viremic for >40 days were tested for WNV-neutralizing activity. Follow up of 35 additional viremic donors for up to 404 days was conducted to evaluate persistence of WNV-specific antibody. RESULTS: The median time from RNA detection to IgM seroconversion was 3.9 days; to IgG seroconversion, 7.7 days; to RNA negativity by single-replicate TMA, 13.2 days; and to RNA negativity by 6-replicate TMA, 6.1 additional days after results of single-replicate TMA are negative. For 4 donors in whom RNA persisted for >40 days after the index donation, all samples obtained after this threshold were also positive for WNV IgG and neutralizing activity. The mean times to IgM and IgA negativity were 156 and 220 days, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: IgM and IgG develop rapidly after viremia and before RNA levels become undetectable, which occurred a mean of 13.2 days after the index donation among donors in this study. WNV RNA detection by replicate TMA rarely persists for >40 days after the index donation and is accompanied by WNV-specific neutralizing antibody, consistent with an absence of WNV transmission via transfusion of seropositive blood components.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".