<scp>Nano‐RECall</scp> provides an integrated pipeline for <scp>HIV</scp>‐1 drug resistance testing from Oxford Nanopore sequence data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Low-capital-layout sequencing options from Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) could assist in expanding HIV drug resistance testing to resource-limited settings. HIV drug resistance mutations often occur as mixtures, but current ONT pipelines provide a consensus sequence only. Moreover, there is no integrated pipeline that provides a drug resistance report from an ONT sequence file without intervention from skilled bioinformaticists. We therefore investigated Nano-RECall, which provides seamless drug resistance interpretation while requiring low-read coverage ONT sequence data from affordable Flongle or MinION flow cells and which provides mutation mixtures similar to Sanger Sequencing. METHODS: We compared Sanger sequencing to ONT sequencing of the same HIV-1 subtype C polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplicons, respectively using RECall and the novel Nano-RECall bioinformatics pipelines. Amplicons were from separate assays: (a) Applied Biosystems HIV-1 Genotyping Kit (ThermoFisher) spanning protease (PR) to reverse transcriptase (RT) (PR-RT) (n = 46) and (b) homebrew integrase (IN) (n = 21). The agreement between Sanger sequences and ONT sequences was assessed at nucleotide level, and at codon level for Stanford HIV drug resistance database mutations at an optimal ONT read depth of 400 reads only. RESULTS: The average sequence similarity between ONT and Sanger sequences was 99.3% (95% CI: 99.1%-99.4%) for PR-RT and 99.6% (95% CI: 99.4%-99.7%) for INT. Drug resistance mutations did not differ for 21 IN specimens; 8 mutations were detected by both ONT- and Sanger sequencing. For the 46 PR and RT specimens, 245 mutations were detected by either ONT or Sanger, of these 238 (97.1%) were detected by both. CONCLUSIONS: The Nano-RECall pipeline, freely available as a downloadable application on a Windows computer, provides Sanger-equivalent HIV drug resistance interpretation. This novel pipeline combined with a simple workflow and multiplexing samples on ONT flow-cells would contribute to making HIV drug resistance sequencing feasible for resource-limited settings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.008 |
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".