MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414082484 · doi:10.1128/mbio.01881-25

Bayesian estimation of HIV acquisition dates for prevention trials

2025· article· en· W4414082484 on OpenAlexaff
Raabya Rossenkhan, Elena E. Giorgi, Danica Shao, James P. Ludwig, Jan Phillipus Lourens Labuschagne, Craig A. Magaret, Thumbi Ndung’u, Daniel Muema, Kamini Gounder, Krista L. Dong, Bruce D. Walker, Morgane Rolland, Merlin L. Robb, Leigh Anne Eller, Fred Sawe, Sorachai Nitayaphan, Eduard Grebe, M. Busch, Kevin P. Delaney, Shelley N. Facente, Lindsay N. Carpp, Allan C. deCamp, Yunda Huang, Bette Korber, Michal Juraska, Erika Rudnicki, Ewelina Kosmider, Daniel B. Reeves, Bryan T. Mayer, John Hural, Wenjie Deng, Dylan H. Westfall, Anna Yssel, David Matten, Tanmoy Bhattacharya, Lawrence Corey, Peter B. Gilbert, Carolyn Williamson, James I. Mullins, Paul T. Edlefsen

Bibliographic record

VenuemBio · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesHenry M. Jackson FoundationBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)CohortBayesian probabilityMean squared errorEstimationCohort studyPipeline (software)Prospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate timing estimates of when participants acquire HIV in HIV prevention trials are necessary for determining antibody levels at acquisition. The Antibody-Mediated Prevention (AMP) Studies showed that a passively administered broadly neutralizing antibody can prevent the acquisition of HIV from a neutralization-sensitive virus. We developed a pipeline for estimating the date of detectable HIV acquisition (DDA) in AMP Study participants using diagnostic and viral sequence data. Using a Bayesian strategy that combines three streams of data (REN [rev/vpu/env/Δnef] sequence, GP [gag/Δpol] sequence, and diagnostic) where their 95% credible intervals overlap based on pre-specified criteria and decision rules. We evaluated the performance of our AMP pipeline using PacBio viral sequence data from 41 participants across two prospective acute HIV acquisition cohort studies, FRESH and RV217, with twice-weekly sampling. These cohort studies enrolled young women in South Africa and men and women in Kenya and Thailand, respectively, with a high likelihood of HIV acquisition. In evaluating performance, "true DDA" was the center of bounds between last-negative and first-positive RNA diagnostic tests (median time 4 days, range 2-7 days); bias was the mean difference between estimated and true DDA. Using diagnostic data alone yielded timing estimates with a bias of 2.4 days and root mean square error (RMSE) of 7.9 days. These results were improved using sequence + diagnostic data (bias 1.5 days, RMSE 6.9 days), as well as by restricting sequence-based estimation to samples from ≤5 weeks post-DDA (bias 0.2 days, RMSE 7.8 days).IMPORTANCEIn HIV prevention trials, accurate timing estimates of when individual participants acquire HIV can be used to estimate antibody levels at the time of acquisition, which is useful for projecting antibody levels needed for prevention. The results we report here suggest that if sequence-based estimation of acquisition timing is used in future clinical trials of combination broadly neutralizing antibody (bnAb) regimens or multispecific bnAbs for HIV prevention, a sampling frequency of at least monthly is needed. Moreover, in the samples analyzed here, we observed less bias in sequence-based timing estimation for samples taken <5 weeks post-DDA. This observation is consistent with the timing of immune-driven selective pressures that may negatively impact the power to detect acquisition sieve effects.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.327 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemBioSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207