Serological Studies of West Nile Virus in a Liver Transplant Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant populations are at increased risk for serious clinical manifestations of West Nile virus (WNV) infection. OBJECTIVE: To monitor liver transplant recipients during the 2003 WNV season in Manitoba and to identify incidence, clinical presentation and serology. METHODS: Serial blood specimens were obtained from adult patients followed at the liver transplant outpatient clinic between May 2003 and October 2003. Studies for WNV infection included immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgM enzyme immunoassay (EIA), hemagglutination inhibition (HI), plaque reduction neutralization test and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: None of the 79 patients had clinical presentations suggestive of WNV infection. On testing of the final serum specimen obtained, 14 patients (18%) had positive IgG anti-WNV by EIA and six patients (7%) had indeterminate IgG anti-WNV by EIA, although all were negative by IgM EIA. Four (20%) of the EIA-positive samples were reactive by HI, but all of these were negative by WNV plaque reduction neutralization test; this is consistent with the presence of non-West Nile flavivirus antibody in these sera. Blood specimens obtained throughout the season from EIA- and HI-positive individuals were uniformly negative for WNV-RNA by reverse transcriptasepolymerase chain reaction. Age, sex, hematology and biochemistry findings, hepatitis B or C virus status, immunosuppressive regimen (cyclosporin or tacrolimus) and pretransplant diagnosis of liver disease were similar for EIA-positive and EIA-negative patients. For the 10 patients with a positive IgG EIA maintained on cyclosporin, the cyclosporin level was 129.1+/-28.6 microg/L compared with 85.6+/-36.7 microg/L in 26 patients who were EIA-negative (P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: False-positive IgG EIA serology for WNV was common in this cohort of liver transplant recipients, and was associated with elevated serum cyclosporin levels.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".