Shared immunotherapeutic approaches in HIV and hepatitis B virus: combine and conquer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this study was to identify similarities, differences and lessons to be shared from recent progress in HIV and hepatitis B virus (HBV) immunotherapeutic approaches. RECENT FINDINGS: Immune dysregulation is a hallmark of both HIV and HBV infection, which have shared routes of transmission, with approximately 10% of HIV-positive patients worldwide being coinfected with HBV. Immune modulation therapies to orchestrate effective innate and adaptive immune responses are currently being sought as potential strategies towards a functional cure in both HIV and HBV infection. These are based on activating immunological mechanisms that would allow durable control by triggering innate immunity, reviving exhausted endogenous responses and/or generating new immune responses. Recent technological advances and increased appreciation of humoral responses in the control of HIV have generated renewed enthusiasm in the cure field. SUMMARY: For both HIV and HBV infection, a primary consideration with immunomodulatory therapies continues to be a balance between generating highly effective immune responses and mitigating any significant toxicity. A large arsenal of new approaches and ongoing research offer the opportunity to define the pathways that underpin chronic infection and move closer to a functional cure.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".