Evaluation of Phylogenetic Methods for Inferring the Direction of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Transmission: HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 052
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Phylogenetic analysis can be used to assess human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission in populations. We inferred the direction of HIV transmission using whole-genome HIV sequences from couples with known linked infection and known transmission direction. METHODS: Complete next-generation sequencing (NGS) data were obtained for 105 unique index-partner sample pairs from 32 couples enrolled in the HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 052 study (up to 2 samples/person). Index samples were obtained up to 5.5 years before partner infection; partner samples were obtained near the time of seroconversion. The bioinformatics method, phyloscanner, was used to infer transmission direction. Analyses were performed using samples from individual sample pairs, samples from all couples (1 sample/person; group analysis), and all available samples (multisample group analysis). Analysis was also performed using NGS data from defined regions of the HIV genome (gag, pol, env). RESULTS: Using whole-genome NGS data, transmission direction was inferred correctly (index to partner) for 98 of 105 (93.3%) of the individual sample pairs, 99 of 105 (94.3%) sample pairs using group analysis, and 31 of the 32 couples (96.9%) using multisample group analysis. There were no cases where the incorrect transmission direction (partner to index) was inferred. The accuracy of the method was higher with greater time between index and partner sample collection. Pol region sequences performed better than env or gag sequences for inferring transmission direction. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate the potential of a phylogenetic method to infer the direction of HIV transmission between 2 individuals using whole-genome and pol NGS data.
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 | 0.151 | 0.223 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".