4.6 Article

Clustering of Th cell epitopes on exposed regions of HIV envelope despite defects in antibody activity

Journal

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 171, Issue 8, Pages 4140-4148

Publisher

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.171.8.4140

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P30-CA21765] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [P01-AI45142] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A long-standing question in the field of immunology concerns the factors that contribute to Th cell epitope immunodominance. For a number of viral membrane proteins, Th cell epitopes are localized to exposed protein surfaces, often overlapping with Ab binding sites. It has therefore been proposed that Abs on B cell surfaces selectively bind and protect exposed protein fragments during Ag processing, and that this interaction helps to shape the Th cell repertoire. While attractive in concept, this hypothesis has not been thoroughly tested. To test this hypothesis, we have compared Th cell peptide immunodominance in normal C57BL/6 mice with that in C57BL/6(muMT/muMT) mice (lacking normal B cell activity). Animals were first vaccinated with DNA constructs expressing one of three different HIV envelope proteins, after which the CD4(+) T cell response profiles were characterized toward overlapping peptides using an IFN-gamma ELISPOT assay. We found a striking similarity between the peptide response profiles in the two mouse strains. Profiles also matched those of previous experiments in which different envelope vaccination regimens were used. Our results clearly demonstrate that normal Ab activity is not required for the establishment or maintenance of Th peptide immunodominance in the HIV envelope response. To explain the clustering of Th cell epitopes, we propose that localization of peptide on exposed envelope surfaces facilitates proteolytic activity and preferential peptide shuttling through the Ag processing pathway.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available