HCV Activates Somatic L1 Retrotransposition—A Potential Hepatocarcinogenesis Pathway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a common cause of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The activation and mutagenic consequences of L1 retrotransposons in virus-associated-HCC have been documented. However, the direct influence of HCV upon L1 elements is unclear, and is the focus of the present study. L1 transcript expression was evaluated in a publicly available liver tissue RNA-seq dataset from patients with chronic HCV hepatitis (CHC), as well as healthy controls. L1 transcript expression was significantly higher in CHC than in controls. L1orf1p (a L1 encoded protein) expression was observed in six out of 11 CHC livers by immunohistochemistry. To evaluate the influence of HCV on retrotransposition efficiency, in vitro engineered-L1 retrotransposition assays were employed in Huh7 cells in the presence and absence of an HCV replicon. An increased retrotransposition rate was observed in the presence of replicating HCV RNA, and persisted in cells after viral clearance due to sofosbuvir (PSI7977) treatment. Increased retrotransposition could be due to dysregulation of the DNA-damage repair response, including homologous recombination, due to HCV infection. Altogether these data suggest that L1 expression can be activated before oncogenic transformation in CHC patients, with HCV-upregulated retrotransposition potentially contributing to HCC genomic instability and a risk of transformation that persists post-viral clearance.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".