ArticlePLoS computational biology2021
Factors influencing estimates of HIV-1 infection timing using BEAST.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- High peak viraemia followed by spontaneous HIV-1 control in women living with HIV-1 subtype A1 in East Africa.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2025Article
- Characterising HIV-1 transmission in Victoria, Australia: a molecular epidemiological study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2024Article
- Using viral sequence diversity to estimate time of HIV infection in infants.PLoS pathogens · 2023Article
- Optimal sequence-based design for multi-antigen HIV-1 vaccines using minimally distant antigens.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- HIV-1 infections with multiple founders associate with the development of neutralization breadth.PLoS pathogens · 2022Article
- Timing HIV infection with a simple and accurate population viral dynamics model.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While large datasets of HIV-1 sequences are increasingly being generated, many studies rely on a single gene or fragment of the genome and few comparative studies across genes have been done. We performed genome-based and gene-specific Bayesian phylogenetic analyses to investigate how certain factors impact estimates of the infection dates in an acute HIV-1 infection cohort, RV217. In this cohort, HIV-1 diagnosis corresponded to the first RNA positive test and occurred a median of four days after the last negative test, allowing us to compare timing estimates using BEAST to a narrow window of infection. We analyzed HIV-1 sequences sampled one week, one month and six months after HIV-1 diagnosis in 39 individuals. We found that shared diversity and temporal signal was limited in acute infection, and insufficient to allow timing inferences in the shortest HIV-1 genes, thus dated phylogenies were primarily analyzed for env, gag, pol and near full-length genomes. There was no one best-fitting model across participants and genes, though relaxed molecular clocks (73% of best-fitting models) and the Bayesian skyline (49%) tended to be favored. For infections with single founders, the infection date was estimated to be around one week pre-diagnosis for env (IQR: 3-9 days) and gag (IQR: 5-9 days), whilst the genome placed it at a median of 10 days (IQR: 4-19). Multiply-founded infections proved problematic to date. Our ability to compare timing inferences to precise estimates of HIV-1 infection (within a week) highlights that molecular dating methods can be applied to within-host datasets from early infection. Nonetheless, our results also suggest caution when using uniform clock and population models or short genes with limited information content.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.