Efficacies of Gel Formulations Containing Foscarnet, Alone or Combined with Sodium Lauryl Sulfate, against Establishment and Reactivation of Latent Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) on the efficacies of gel formulations of foscarnet against herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) cutaneous lesions and on the establishment and reactivation of latent virus has been evaluated in a murine model of orofacial infection. Topical treatments were given twice daily for 3 days and were initiated at 6, 24, and 48 h after virus inoculation. The gel formulation that contained both 3% foscarnet and 5% SLS and that was administered within 48 h postinfection reduced the rate of development of herpetic skin lesions. This formulation also significantly decreased the viral content in skin tissues and in ipsilateral trigeminal ganglia when it was given within 24 and 6 h postinfection, respectively. A lower level of efficacy was observed for the gel formulation containing 3% foscarnet alone. Of prime interest, the gel formulation containing 5% SLS reduced significantly the mortality rate among mice in a zosteriform model of infection. Both formulations of foscarnet had no effect on the mean titers of reactivated virus in explant cultures of ipsilateral and contralateral trigeminal ganglia from latently infected mice. The use of a gel formulation containing combinations of foscarnet and SLS could represent an attractive approach for the treatment of herpetic mucocutaneous infections.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".