Pre-clinical evaluation of antiproteases as potential candidates for HIV-1 pre-exposure prophylaxis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies on highly HIV-1-exposed, yet persistently seronegative women from the Punwami Sex Worker cohort in Kenya, have shed light on putative protective mechanisms, suggesting that mucosal immunological factors, such as antiproteases, could be mediating resistance to HIV-1 transmission in the female reproductive tract. Nine protease inhibitors were selected for this study: serpin B4, serpin A1, serpin A3, serpin C1, cystatin A, cystatin B, serpin B13, serpin B1 and α-2-macroglobulin-like-protein 1. We assessed in a pilot study, the activity of these antiproteases with cellular assays and an ex vivo HIV-1 challenge model of human ecto-cervical tissue explants. Preliminary findings with both models, cellular and tissue explants, established an order of inhibitory potency for the mucosal proteins as candidates for pre-exposure prophylaxis when mimicking pre-coital use. Combination of all antiproteases considered in this study was more active than any of the individual mucosal proteins. Furthermore, the migration of cells out of ecto-cervical explants was blocked indicating potential prevention of viral dissemination following amplification of the founder population. These findings constitute the base for further development of these mucosal protease inhibitors for prevention strategies.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it