<i>G6PD</i> variant distribution in sub-Saharan Africa and potential risks of using chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine based treatments for COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine have been proposed as potential treatments for COVID-19. These drugs have warning labels for use in individuals with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency. Analysis of whole-genome sequence data of 458 individuals from sub-Saharan Africa showed significant G6PD variation across the continent. We identified nine variants, of which four are potentially deleterious to G6PD function, and one (rs1050828) that is known to cause G6PD deficiency. We supplemented data for the rs1050828 variant with genotype array data from over 11,000 Africans. Although this variant is common in Africans overall, large allele frequency differences exist between sub-populations. African sub-populations in the same country can show significant differences in allele frequency (e.g. 16.0% in Tsonga vs 0.8% in Xhosa, both in South Africa, p = 2.4 × 10 −3 ). The high prevalence of variants in the G6PD gene found in this analysis suggests that it may be a significant interaction factor in clinical trials of chloroquine and hydrochloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 in Africans.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".