4.8 Article

FCGR2C polymorphisms associate with HIV-1 vaccine protection in RV144 trial

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 124, 期 9, 页码 3879-3890

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI75539

关键词

-

资金

  1. US Army Medical Research and Material Command [Y1-AI-2642-12]
  2. NIAID [Y1-AI-2642-12]
  3. Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine Inc. [W81XWH-07-2-0067]
  4. US Department of Defense [W81XWH-07-2-0067]
  5. NIH/NIAID [AI067854, UM1AI-068618, R37AI054165]
  6. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [R01 HL114901]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The phase III RV144 HIV-1 vaccine trial estimated vaccine efficacy (VE) to be 31.2%. This trial demonstrated that the presence of HIV-1-specific IgG-binding Abs to envelope (Env) V1V2 inversely correlated with infection risk, while the presence of Env-specific plasma IgA Abs directly correlated with risk of HIV-1 infection. Moreover, Ab-dependent cellular cytotoxicity responses inversely correlated with risk of infection in vaccine recipients with low IgA; therefore, we hypothesized that vaccine-induced Fc receptor-mediated (FcR-mediated) Ab function is indicative of vaccine protection. We sequenced exons and surrounding areas of FcR-encoding genes and found one FCGR2C tag SNP (rs114945036) that associated with VE against HIV-1 subtype CRF01_AE, with lysine at position 169 (169K) in the V2 loop (CRF01_AE 169K). Individuals carrying CC in this SNP had an estimated VE of 15%, while individuals carrying CT or TT exhibited a VE of 91%. Furthermore, the rs114945036 SNP was highly associated with 3 other FCGR2C SNPs (rs138747765, rs78603008, and rs373013207). Env-specific IgG and IgG3 Abs, IgG avidity, and neutralizing Abs inversely correlated with CRF01_AE 169K HIV-1 infection risk in the CT- or TT-carrying vaccine recipients only. These data suggest a potent role of Fc-gamma receptors and Fc-mediated Ab function in conferring protection from transmission risk in the RV144 VE trial.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据