Hepatitis C virus‐specific immune responses following direct‐acting antivirals administered during recent hepatitis C virus infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals who spontaneously clear hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have demonstrated evidence of partial protective immunity, whereas treatment-induced clearance provides little or no protection against reinfection. We aimed to investigate whether treatment of acute HCV infection with direct-acting antivirals (DAA) prevents establishment of, or reverses, T-cell exhaustion, leading to a virus-specific T-cell immune profile more similar to that seen in spontaneous clearance. The magnitude and breadth of HCV-specific T-cell responses before and after DAA or interferon-based therapy in acute or chronic HCV were compared to those of participants with spontaneous clearance of infection, using Enzyme-linked Immunospot (ELISPOT). PBMCs were available for 55 patients comprising 4 groups: spontaneous clearance (n = 17), acute interferon (n = 14), acute DAA (n = 13) and chronic DAA (n = 11). After controlling for sex, the magnitude of post-treatment HCV-specific responses after acute DAA treatment was greater than after chronic DAA or acute IFN treatment and similar to those found in spontaneous clearers. However, spontaneous clearers responded to more HCV peptide pools indicating greater breadth of response. In conclusion, early treatment with DAAs may prevent or reverse some degree of immune exhaustion and result in stronger HCV-specific responses post-treatment. However, individuals with spontaneous clearance had broader HCV-specific responses.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".