MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047350970 · doi:10.1097/coh.0000000000000637

Opening the HIV envelope: potential of CD4 mimics as multifunctional HIV entry inhibitors

2020· review· en· W3047350970 on OpenAlexafffund
Annemarie Laumaea, Amos B. Smith, Joseph Sodroski, Andrés Finzi

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Computational biologyMedicineDrugBiologyDrug discoveryBioinformaticsPharmacologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Close to 2 million individuals globally become infected with HIV-1 each year and just over two-thirds will have access to life-prolonging antivirals. However, the rapid development of drug resistance creates challenges, such that generation of more effective therapies is not only warranted but a necessary endeavour. This review discusses a group of HIV-1 entry inhibitors known as CD4 mimics which exploit the highly conserved relationship between the HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein and the receptor, CD4. RECENT FINDINGS: We review the structure/function guided evolution of these inhibitors, vital mechanistic insights that underpin broad and potent functional antagonism, recent evidence of utility demonstrated in animal and physiologically relevant in-vitro models, and current progress towards effective new-generation inhibitors. SUMMARY: The current review highlights the promising potential of CD4 mimetics as multifunctional therapeutics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in HIV and AIDSSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207