Activity of nucleic acid polymers in rodent models of HBV infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nucleic acid polymers (NAPs) block the release of HBsAg from infected hepatocytes. These compounds have been previously shown to have the unique ability to eliminate serum surface antigen in DHBV-infected Pekin ducks and achieve multilog reduction of HBsAg or HBsAg loss in patients with chronic HBV infection and HBV/HDV coinfection. In ducks and humans, the blockage of HBsAg release by NAPs occurs by the selective targeting of the assembly and/or secretion of subviral particles (SVPs). The clinically active NAP species REP 2055 and REP 2139 were investigated in other relevant animal models of HBV infection including woodchucks chronically infected with WHV, HBV transgenic mice and HBV infected SCID-Hu mice. The liver accumulation of REP 2139 in woodchucks following subcutaneous administration was examined and was found to be similar to that observed in mice and ducks. However, in woodchucks, NAP treatment was associated with only mild (36-79% relative to baseline) reductions in WHsAg (4/10 animals) after 3-5 weeks of treatment without changes in serum WHV DNA. In HBV infected SCID-Hu mice, REP 2055 treatment was not associated with any reduction of HBsAg, HBeAg or HBV DNA in the serum after 28 days of treatment. In HBV transgenic mice, no reductions in serum HBsAg were observed with REP 2139 with up to 12 weeks of treatment. In conclusion, the antiviral effects of NAPs in DHBV infected ducks and patients with chronic HBV infection were weak or absent in woodchuck and mouse models despite similar liver accumulation of NAPs in all these species, suggesting that the mechanisms of SVP assembly and or secretion present in rodent models differs from that in DHBV and chronic HBV 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".