MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770731797 · doi:10.1016/j.tim.2017.10.007

Impact of HIV-1 Envelope Conformation on ADCC Responses

2017· review· en· W2770731797 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Richard, Jérémie Prévost, Nirmin Alsahafi, Shilei Ding, Andrés Finzi

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Microbiology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchamfAR, The Foundation for AIDS Research
KeywordsBiologyEnvelope (radar)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicityVirologyComputational biologyGeneticsTelecommunicationsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HIV-1 envelope glycoproteins (Env) represent the only virus-specific antigen exposed at the surface of infected cells. In its unliganded form, Env from primary viruses samples a 'closed' conformation (State 1), which is preferentially recognized by broadly neutralizing antibodies (bNAbs). CD4 engagement drives Env into an intermediate 'partially open' (State 2) and then into the 'open' CD4-bound conformation (State 3). Emerging evidence suggests a link between Env conformation and Ab-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC). HIV-1-infected cells exposing Env in the CD4-bound conformation are susceptible to ADCC mediated by CD4-induced Abs and HIV+sera. Cells exposing State 1 Env are susceptible to ADCC mediated by bNAbs. Here, we discuss how Env conformation affects ADCC responses and in vitro measurements.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations92
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueTrends in MicrobiologySame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207