Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Cell-Mediated Immunity and CMV Infection After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: The REACT Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT) recipients. CMV cell-mediated immunity (CMV-CMI) as determined by a peptide-based enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) CMV assay may identify patients at risk for clinically significant CMV infection (CS-CMVi). METHODS: The CS-CMVi was defined as CMV viremia and/or disease necessitating antiviral therapy. CMV-CMI was characterized as high when the intermediate-early 1 (IE-1) antigen spot counts (SPCs) were >100 (cutoff 1) or when the IE-1 and phosphoprotein 65 antigen SPCs were both >100 SPCs per 250 000 cells (cutoff 2), and a low CMV-CMI when SPCs were below these thresholds. In this prospective multicenter study, we evaluated CMV-CMI every 2 weeks from the pretransplant period until 6 months posttransplantation in 241 allo-HCT recipients with positive CMV serostatus. The primary endpoint was CS-CMVi occurring within 2 weeks of the last measurement of CMV-CMI. RESULTS: CS-CMVi occurred in 70 allo-HCT recipients (29%). CMV-CMI was low in patients who experienced CS-CMVi (94%), whereas those who had a high CMV-CMI were less likely to have CS-CMVi (P < .0001). Patients with CS-CMVi had higher all-cause mortality (P = .007), especially those with low CMV-CMI (P = .035). On multivariable analysis, CMV-CMI, sex, race, antithymocyte globulin, and steroid use were independent predictors of CS-CMVi, and the time from transplant to engraftment was the only predictor of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of CMV-CMI using a novel ELISPOT assay would be useful clinically to monitor allo-HCT recipients and distinguish between those at risk of developing CS-CMVi and requiring antiviral prophylaxis or therapy and those who are protected.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".