In this task, you're given a paragraph from the research paper and your task is to generate a suitable title for the research paper based on the given paper. Under 100 words is a good title length.

In the present studies , we report the cloning and structural characterization of the HFGL2 gene and its functional role in human fulminant hepatitis. The HFGL2 gene is approximately 7 kb in length with 2 exons. The putative promoter contains cis element consensus sequences that strongly suggest the inducibility of its expression. From the nucleotide sequence of the human gene , a 439-amino acid long protein is predicted. The overall identity between the murine fgl2 and hfgl2 coded proteins is over 70%. About 225 amino acids at the carboxyl end of these molecules are almost 90% identical , and correspond to a well-conserved fibrinogen-related domain. Both HFGL2 and FGL2 encode a type II transmembrane protein with a predicted catalytic domain toward the amino terminus of the protein. Transient transfection of Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells with a fulllength cDNA of HFGL2 coding region resulted in high levels of prothrombinase activity. Livers from 8 patients transplanted for fulminant viral hepatitis were examined for extent of necrosis , inflammation, fibrin deposition , and HFGL2 induction. In situ hybridization showed positive staining of macrophages in areas of active hepatocellular necrosis. Fibrin stained positively in these areas and was confirmed by electron microscopy. These studies define a unique prothrombinase gene (HFGL2) and implicate its importance in the pathogenesis of fulminant viral hepatitis.
Molecular and Functional Analysis of the Human Prothrombinase Gene (HFGL2) and Its Role in Viral Hepatitis

Background: SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV) was identified as the etiological agent of SARS, and extensive investigations indicated that it originated from an animal source (probably bats) and was recently introduced into the human population via wildlife animals from wet markets in southern China. Previous studies revealed that the spike (S) protein of SARS had experienced adaptive evolution, but whether other functional proteins of SARS have undergone adaptive evolution is not known. We employed several methods to investigate selective pressure among different SARS-CoV groups representing different epidemic periods and hosts. Our results suggest that most functional proteins of SARS-CoV have experienced a stepwise adaptive evolutionary pathway. Similar to previous studies, the spike protein underwent strong positive selection in the early and middle phases, and became stabilized in the late phase. In addition, the replicase experienced positive selection only in human patients, whereas assembly proteins experienced positive selection mainly in the middle and late phases. No positive selection was found in any proteins of bat SARS-like-CoV. Furthermore, specific amino acid sites that may be the targets of positive selection in each group are identified. This extensive evolutionary analysis revealed the stepwise evolution of different functional proteins of SARS-CoVs at different epidemic stages and different hosts. These results support the hypothesis that SARS-CoV originated from bats and that the spill over into civets and humans were more recent events.
Differential stepwise evolution of SARS coronavirus functional proteins in different host species

The three components of the Blueprint prioritization methodology 1. The annual review: • Convening a suitable expert group (Prioritization Committee, Table) covering: 1) microbiology of severe pathogens, including virology, bacteriology and mycology, 2) clinical management of severe infections, 3) Epidemiology, in particular during health emergencies, 4) Public health policy, including emergency response, 5) Animal health, including veterinarians and experts in zoonoses from both livestock and wildlife, 6) experts from the defense or security sectors familiar with biological weapons and 7) other experts, including anthropologists, bioethicists, and other relevant social sciences. • Identifying a long list of diseases to be fed into the annual review process. • Triaging the long list into a shorter list for more detailed analysis. • Conducting that analysis through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)/Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) method and Delphi process. • Communicating the outcome of the review. *EURO: European region, PAHO: American region, SAERO: south-east Asian region, AFRO: African region, WIPRO: West Pacific region. Detailed country members: http://www.who.int/about/regions/en. In accordance with best practice, separate processes were used to develop the methodology and run the annual review (1-5). According to Brookes et al. 2015 , separating these processes improves transparency "by clearly separating decision-makers subjective opinions regarding the value of criteria from measurements for individual pathogens, as well as reducing opportunity for cognitive bias that can arise when directly valuing pathogens" (5). In addition to the annual exercise to update the list, the methodology itself will be reviewed every 2 years. This methodology review involves: convening a group of suitable experts; examining and revising the prioritization criteria and sub-criteria; and updating the weightings applied to the criteria. The broader prioritization process also includes a decision tree for consideration of an unknown disease or a known disease presenting with unusual characteristics. The decision instrument is intended to guide users through: considering available information, determining

World Health Organization Methodology to Prioritize Emerging Infectious Diseases in Need of Research and Development