ReviewJournal of translational medicine2009
Protective versus pathogenic anti-CD4 immunity: insights from the study of natural resistance to HIV infection.
Review in Journal of translational medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Alterations in immunodominance of Streptococcus mutans AgI/II: lessons learned from immunomodulatory antibodies.Vaccine · 2014Article
- Epitopes for Protective Immunity Targeting Antigens of Pathogen and/or Host (EPITAPH): Towards Novel Vaccines Against HIV and Other Medically Challenging Infections.Frontiers in immunology · 2014Review
- Broad-spectrum inhibition of HIV-1 by a monoclonal antibody directed against a gp120-induced epitope of CD4.PloS one · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
HIV-1 exposure causes several dramatic unbalances in the immune system homeostasis. Here, we will focus on the paradox whereby CD4 specific autoimmune responses, which are expected to contribute to the catastrophic loss of most part of the T helper lymphocyte subset in infected patients, may display the characteristics of an unconventional protective immunity in individuals naturally resistant to HIV-1 infection. Reference to differences in fine epitope mapping of these two oppositely polarized outcomes will be presented, with particular reference to partially or totally CD4-gp120 complex-specific antibodies. The fine tuning of the anti-self immune response to the HIV-1 receptor may determine whether viral exposure will result in infection or, alternatively, protective immunity.Along this line, an efficacious anti-HIV strategy can rely on the active (i.e., through immunization) or passive targeting of cryptic epitopes of the CD4-gp120 complex, including those harboured within the CD4 molecule. Such epitopes are expected to be safe from genetic drift and thus allow for broad spectrum of efficacy. Moreover, since these epitopes are not routinely exposed in uninfected individuals, they are expected to become targets of neutralizing antibodies or other specifically designed molecules only after viral exposure, with a predictable low impact in terms of potentially harmful anti-CD4 self-reactivity.The experimentum naturae of naturally resistant individuals indicates a strategy to design innovative strategies to neutralize HIV-1 by acting on the sharp edge between harmful and protective self-reactivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.