MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2141447872 · doi:10.1128/jvi.00483-14

An Evaluation of Phylogenetic Methods for Reconstructing Transmitted HIV Variants using Longitudinal Clonal HIV Sequence Data

2014· article· en· W2141447872 on OpenAlexafffund
Rosemary M. McCloskey, Richard Liang, P. Richard Harrigan, Zabrina L. Brumme, Art F. Y. Poon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Virology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAIDS VancouverSimon Fraser University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyIndelPhylogenetic treePhylogeneticsContext (archaeology)GeneticsEvolutionary biologyViral quasispeciesSequence (biology)GenomeFalse positive paradoxGeneGenotypeStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: A population of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) within a host often descends from a single transmitted/founder virus. The high mutation rate of HIV, coupled with long delays between infection and diagnosis, make isolating and characterizing this strain a challenge. In theory, ancestral reconstruction could be used to recover this strain from sequences sampled in chronic infection; however, the accuracy of phylogenetic techniques in this context is unknown. To evaluate the accuracy of these methods, we applied ancestral reconstruction to a large panel of published longitudinal clonal and/or single-genome-amplification HIV sequence data sets with at least one intrapatient sequence set sampled within 6 months of infection or seroconversion (n = 19,486 sequences, median [interquartile range] = 49 [20 to 86] sequences/set). The consensus of the earliest sequences was used as the best possible estimate of the transmitted/founder. These sequences were compared to ancestral reconstructions from sequences sampled at later time points using both phylogenetic and phylogeny-naive methods. Overall, phylogenetic methods conferred a 16% improvement in reproducing the consensus of early sequences, compared to phylogeny-naive methods. This relative advantage increased with intrapatient sequence diversity (P < 10(-5)) and the time elapsed between the earliest and subsequent samples (P < 10(-5)). However, neither approach performed well for reconstructing ancestral indel variation, especially within indel-rich regions of the HIV genome. Although further improvements are needed, our results indicate that phylogenetic methods for ancestral reconstruction significantly outperform phylogeny-naive alternatives, and we identify experimental conditions and study designs that can enhance accuracy of transmitted/founder virus reconstruction. IMPORTANCE: When HIV is transmitted into a new host, most of the viruses fail to infect host cells. Consequently, an HIV infection tends to be descended from a single "founder" virus. A priority target for the vaccine research, these transmitted/founder viruses are difficult to isolate since newly infected individuals are often unaware of their status for months or years, by which time the virus population has evolved substantially. Here, we report on the potential use of evolutionary methods to reconstruct the genetic sequence of the transmitted/founder virus from its descendants at later stages of an infection. These methods can recover this ancestral sequence with an overall error rate of about 2.3%-about 15% more information than if we had ignored the evolutionary relationships among viruses. Although there is no substitute for sampling infections at earlier points in time, these methods can provide useful information about the genetic makeup of transmitted/founder HIV.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Virology→Same topicHIV Research and Treatment→French-language works237,207→