ArticleScandinavian journal of immunology2021
Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 haplotypes and genomic sequences during 2020 in Victoria, Australia, in the context of putative deficits in innate immune deaminase anti-viral responses.
Article in Scandinavian journal of immunology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Nasal Vaccine Candidate, Containing Three Antigenic Regions from SARS-CoV-2, to Induce a Broader Response.Vaccines · 2024Article
- Article
- Haplotypic Distribution of SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Cases of Intradomiciliary Infection in the State of Rondônia, Western Amazon.Bioinformatics and biology insights · 2024Article
- Article
- Nature of Acquired Immune Responses, Epitope Specificity and Resultant Protection from SARS-CoV-2.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 haplotypes and genomic sequences during 2020 in Victoria, Australia, in the context of putative deficits in innate immune deaminase anti-viral responses.Scandinavian journal of immunology · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The SARS-CoV-2 epidemic infections in Australia during 2020 were small in number in epidemiological terms and are well described. The SARS-CoV-2 genomic sequence data of many infected patients have been largely curated in a number of publicly available databases, including the corresponding epidemiological data made available by the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services. We have critically analysed the available SARS-CoV-2 haplotypes and genomic sequences in the context of putative deficits in innate immune APOBEC and ADAR deaminase anti-viral responses. It is now known that immune impaired elderly co-morbid patients display clear deficits in interferon type 1 (α/β) and III (λ) stimulated innate immune gene cascades, of which APOBEC and ADAR induced expression are part. These deficiencies may help explain some of the clear genetic patterns in SARS-CoV-2 genomes isolated in Victoria, Australia, during the 2nd Wave (June-September, 2020). We tested the hypothesis that predicted lowered innate immune APOBEC and ADAR anti-viral deaminase responses in a significant proportion of elderly patients would be consistent with/reflected in a low level of observed mutagenesis in many isolated SARS-CoV-2 genomes. Our findings are consistent with this expectation. The analysis also supports the conclusions of the Victorian government's Department of Health that essentially one variant or haplotype infected Victorian aged care facilities where the great majority (79%) of all 820 SARS-CoV-2 associated deaths occurred. The implications of our data analysis for other localized epidemics and efficient coronavirus vaccine design and delivery are discussed.
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.