4.8 Article

Decay kinetics of HIV-1 specific T cell responses in vertically HIV-1 exposed seronegative infants

期刊

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 2, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2011.00094

关键词

HIV-1; exposed seronegative; vertically exposed; neonates; T cells

资金

  1. NIH [AI87131, AI60379]
  2. NIH/NCRR UCSF-CTSI [UL1 RR024131]
  3. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo [04/15856-9/Kallas, 2010/05845-0/Kallas]
  4. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq), Brazilian Ministry of Science and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The majority of infants born, in developed countries, to HIV-1 positive women are exposed to the HIV-1 virus in utero or peri/post-partum, but are born uninfected.We, and others, have previously shown HIV-1 specific T cell responses in HIV-1 exposed seronegative (HESN) neonates/infants. Our objective in this study was to examine the rate of decay in their HIV-1 specific T cell response over time from birth. Design: Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of HIV-1 specific T cell responses in HESN infants were performed. Methods: Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) were isolated from 18 HIV-1 DNA PCR negative infants born to HIV-1 infected mothers receiving care at the Jacobi Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA. PBMC were examined for T cell responses to HIV-1 antigens by interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) ELISPOT. Results: PBMC from 15 HESN neonates/infants were analyzed. We observed a decay of HIV-1 specific T cell responses from birth at a rate of -0.599 spot forming unit/10(6) cells per day, with a median half-life decay rate of 21.38 weeks (13.39-115.8). Conclusion: Our results support the dynamic nature of T cell immunity in the context of a developing immune system. The disparate rate of decay with studies of adults placed on antiretroviral drugs suggests that antigen specific T cell responses are driven by the natural rate of decay of the T cell sub-populations themselves.

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