4.6 Article

Antigenic properties of peptide mimotopes of HIV-1-associated carbohydrate antigens

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 280, 期 32, 页码 28959-28965

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M502964200

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [R01AI049092] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The glycan shield of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) envelope protein presents many potential epitopes for vaccine development. To augment immune responses to HIV, type 1 (HIV-1), envelope-associated carbohydrate antigens, we are defining peptide mimics of HIV-associated carbohydrate antigens that function as antigen mimotopes that upon immunization will induce antibodies cross-reactive with carbohydrate antigens. We have previously defined peptides with a putative sequence tract RYRY that mimic concanavalin A-binding glycans. To imitate the multivalent binding of carbohydrates, we compared the avidity of a linear ( 911) and cyclic peptide (D002) reactive with concanavalin A presented in a multiple antigen peptide ( MAP) format. The affinity of the MAP-D002 peptide was higher than that of the peptide MAP-911, whereas the avidity of D002 peptide was lower than that of 911. Serum from mice immunized with MAP-911 had lower titer for oligoman-nose-9 than those elicited by MAP-D002 under the same conditions, but both immunogens elicited antibodies that can block the binding of GP120 to dendritic cells. Antibodies that bind to the studied MAPs were found in a preparation of normal human immunoglobulin for intravenous use. Those that were purified on 911 bound back to 911 and D002, whereas anti-D002 antibodies were specific only for D002. Human antibodies reactive with both mimotopes and with a mannosyl preparation were observed to bind to envelope protein. These results suggested the potential to fine-tune the antibody response to carbohydrate antigens by modifying structural features of peptide mimotope-based immunogens.

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