Analysis of hepatitis B virus genotype changes in patients with chronic hepatitis B infection on tenofovir therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is often required for prolonged periods. We investigated the instance of one HBV genotype switching to another during tenofovir therapy. Of the 67 patients, genotype A was present in 6 (8.9%), D in 43 (65.6%), C in 1 (1.5%), and mixed in 17 (23.8%) patients. Genotype changes were detected in 51 (76.1%) patients on therapy during a follow-up of 192 (range 52-312) weeks. Inter-genotype changes were seen in 17 (33.3%) and intra-genotype in 28 (55%) and both inter- and intra-genotype in 6 of 51 (11.7%) patients. The distribution of genotypes in patients achieving complete virological response was genotype D, 32/43 (74.4%); genotype A, 6/6 (100%); and mixed genotypes, 13/17 (76.47%). The cumulative time of genotype switch among genotype A was 12 months (range 6-18), in genotype D, 12 months (range 6-48), and mixed genotype, 18 months (range 6-24). The type of inter-genotype switch most frequently detected among genotype A1 was from A1 to D1 5/6 (83.3%), followed by mixed to genotype D3 7/13 (54%) and among intra-genotype changes, from D1 to D3 in 14/20 (70%). Pretreatment HBV genotype was the only factor predicting inter-genotype switches with genotype A or mixed genotypes more likely to undergo inter-genotype switches as compared to genotype D patients (OR 66.6 [13.6-327.0, P < 0.001]). Compared to genotype D, genotype A, and mixed genotypes are more inclined to switch while on tenofovir therapy. Genotypes tend to switch and select to a particular type possibly due to constant antiviral drug pressure. J. Med. Virol. 88:1364-1375, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".