MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133511703 · doi:10.1086/324672

Rate of Emergence of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Mutations in Leukocytes of Patients with Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome Who Are Receiving Valganciclovir as Induction and Maintenance Therapy for CMV Retinitis

2001· article· en· W2133511703 on OpenAlexaff
Guy Boivin, Christian Gilbert, Annie Gaudreau, I Greenfield, Rebecca Sudlow, Noel A. Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValganciclovirGanciclovirRetinitisCytomegalovirusVirologyRestriction fragment length polymorphismCytomegalovirus retinitisBiologyHuman cytomegalovirusImmunologyMedicineHerpesviridaeGastroenterologyViral diseaseVirusPolymerase chain reactionGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of mutations conferring ganciclovir resistance was evaluated in an open-label randomized clinical trial that compared oral valganciclovir with intravenous ganciclovir as induction therapy, followed by maintenance with valganciclovir, for newly diagnosed cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis in 148 patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. The presence of CMV mutations was directly assessed in patient leukocytes by polymerase chain reaction, followed by restriction fragment-length polymorphism (RFLP) for detection of the most common UL97 mutations associated with ganciclovir resistance and by sequencing of the viral UL97 gene. The cumulative percentages of patients with UL97-mutant viruses at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months (based on the number of patients on treatment at each time point) was 2.2%, 6.5%, 12.8%, and 15.3%, respectively. Of the 20 relevant UL97 mutations found by sequencing in 14 patients, 14 (70%) were detected by RFLP analysis. The rate of emergence of ganciclovir-resistant viruses with use of oral valganciclovir is no greater than that reported with use of intravenous ganciclovir.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations124
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus researchFrench-language works237,207