A direct-acting antiviral drug abrogates viremia in Zika virus–infected rhesus macaques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zika virus infection in humans has been associated with serious reproductive and neurological complications. At present, no protective antiviral drug treatment is available. Here, we describe the testing and evaluation of the antiviral drug, galidesivir, against Zika virus infection in rhesus macaques. We conducted four preclinical studies in rhesus macaques to assess the safety, antiviral efficacy, and dosing strategies for galidesivir (BCX4430) against Zika virus infection. We treated 70 rhesus macaques infected by various routes with the Puerto Rico or Thai Zika virus isolates. We evaluated galidesivir administered as early as 90 min and as late as 72 hours after subcutaneous Zika virus infection and as late as 5 days after intravaginal infection. We evaluated the efficacy of a range of galidesivir doses with endpoints including Zika virus RNA in plasma, saliva, urine, and cerebrospinal fluid. Galidesivir dosing in rhesus macaques was safe and offered postexposure protection against Zika virus infection. Galidesivir exhibited favorable pharmacokinetics with no observed teratogenic effects in rats or rabbits at any dose tested. The antiviral efficacy of galidesivir observed in the blood and central nervous system of infected animals warrants continued evaluation of this compound for the treatment of flaviviral infections.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".