4.6 Review

Immunologic characteristics of HIV-infected individuals who make broadly neutralizing antibodies

期刊

IMMUNOLOGICAL REVIEWS
卷 275, 期 1, 页码 62-78

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/imr.12504

关键词

autoantibody; broadly neutralizing antibody; CD4(+) T follicular helper cell; CD4(+) T follicular regulatory cell; human immunodeficiency virus; regulatory T cell

资金

  1. NIH, NIAID, Division of AIDS [AI100645]
  2. MRC [MR/K012037]
  3. MRC [MR/K012037/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Medical Research Council [MR/K012037/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Induction of broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) capable of inhibiting infection with diverse variants of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) is a key, as-yet-unachieved goal of prophylactic HIV-1 vaccine strategies. However, some HIV-infected individuals develop bnAbs after approximately 2-4years of infection, enabling analysis of features of these antibodies and the immunological environment that enables their induction. Distinct subsets of CD4(+) T cells play opposing roles in the regulation of humoral responses: T follicular helper (Tfh) cells support germinal center formation and provide help for affinity maturation and the development of memory B cells and plasma cells, while regulatory CD4(+) (Treg) cells including T follicular regulatory (Tfr) cells inhibit the germinal center reaction to limit autoantibody production. BnAbs exhibit high somatic mutation frequencies, long third heavy-chain complementarity determining regions, and/or autoreactivity, suggesting that bnAb generation is likely to be highly dependent on the activity of CD4(+) Tfh cells, and may be constrained by host tolerance controls. This review discusses what is known about the immunological environment during HIV-1 infection, in particular alterations in CD4(+) Tfh, Treg, and Tfr populations and autoantibody generation, and how this is related to bnAb development, and considers the implications for HIV-1 vaccine design.

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

4.6
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