DRAVP: A Comprehensive Database of Antiviral Peptides and Proteins.

Viruses with rapid replication and easy mutation can become resistant to antiviral drug treatment. With novel viral infections emerging, such as the recent COVID-19 pandemic, novel antiviral therapies are urgently needed. Antiviral proteins, such as interferon, have been used for treating chronic hepatitis C infections for decades. Natural-origin antimicrobial peptides, such as defensins, have also been identified as possessing antiviral activities, including direct antiviral effects and the ability to induce indirect immune responses to viruses. To promote the development of antiviral drugs, we constructed a data repository of antiviral peptides and proteins (DRAVP). The database provides general information, antiviral activity, structure information, physicochemical information, and literature information for peptides and proteins. Because most of the proteins and peptides lack experimentally determined structures, AlphaFold was used to predict each antiviral peptide's structure. A free website for users (http://dravp.cpu-bioinfor.org/, accessed on 30 August 2022) was constructed to facilitate data retrieval and sequence analysis. Additionally, all the data can be accessed from the web interface. The DRAVP database aims to be a useful resource for developing antiviral drugs.

Mitigating donor interests in the case of COVID-19 vaccine: the implication of COVAX and DAC membership.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 vaccine donation process allegedly prioritised national interests over humanitarian needs. We thus examined how donors allocated vaccines by recipient country needs versus donor national interests and how such decisions varied across donation channels (bilateral vs COVAX with country earmarking) or exposure to foreign aid norms (membership status in the Development Assistance Committee-DAC). METHODS: We used the two-part regression model to examine how the probability of becoming a recipient country and the volume of vaccines received were associated with recipient countries' needs (disease burden and GDP per capita), donor countries' interests (bilateral trade volume and voting distance in the United Nations General Assembly) and recipient countries' population size. The analysis further interacted the determinants with channel and DAC status. RESULTS: Donors preferentially selected countries with higher disease burden, lower GDP per capita, closer trade relations, more different voting preferences, and smaller populations. Compared with bilateral arrangements, COVAX encouraged more needs-based considerations (lower GDP per capita), less interest-based calculus (more distant economic relations and voting preferences) and larger population size. Compared with the DAC counterparts, the non-DAC donors focused more on politically and economically aligned countries but also on less economically developed countries. As for the volume of vaccines donated, countries received more vaccines if they had tighter trade relations with donors, more different voting patterns than donors, and larger populations. COVAX was associated with raising the volumes of vaccines to politically distant countries, and non-DAC donors donated more to countries with stronger trade relations and political alignment. CONCLUSION: Donors consider both recipient needs and national interests when allocating COVID-19 vaccines. COVAX and DAC partially mitigated donors' focus on domestic interests. Future global health aid can similarly draw on multilateral and normative arrangements.