ReviewmAbs
Accessing the human repertoire for broadly neutralizing HIV antibodies.
Review in mAbs. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing Recombinant Antibodies by Phage Display Against Infectious Diseases and Toxins for Diagnostics and Therapy.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Review
- Broadly Neutralizing Antibodies against HIV: Back to Blood.Trends in molecular medicine · 2019Review
- Antibody Repertoire Analysis of Hepatitis C Virus Infections Identifies Immune Signatures Associated With Spontaneous Clearance.Frontiers in immunology · 2018Article
- Antibody-Mediated Therapy against HIV/AIDS: Where Are We Standing Now?Journal of pathogens · 2018Review
- Insights From Analysis of Human Antigen-Specific Memory B Cell Repertoires.Frontiers in immunology · 2018Review
- Recombinant antibodies for diagnostics and therapy against pathogens and toxins generated by phage display.Proteomics. Clinical applications · 2016Review
- Generation of Recombinant Antibodies Against Toxins and Viruses by Phage Display for Diagnostics and Therapy.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2016Review
- Profiling the IgOme: meeting the challenge.FEBS letters · 2014Review
- Article
- Pushing the envelope on HIV-1 neutralization.Nature biotechnology · 2010Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The human antibody response has special significance in the ongoing efforts to develop a protective HIV vaccine. The observation that a subset of HIV infected individuals, who do not develop AIDS, have a broadly neutralizing antibody response has drawn attention to deciphering the nature of this response. It is hoped that an understanding of these protective antibodies, developed over time in response to the ongoing accumulation of mutations in the infecting virus, will facilitate the development of a vaccine that can elicit a similar response. This strategy will be greatly aided by the identification of broadly neutralizing monoclonal HIV antibodies from infected individuals. Several methods have been utilized to isolate and characterize individual antibodies from the human repertoire and each of these methods has been applied to the generation of broadly neutralizing HIV antibodies, albeit with differing rates of success. This review describes several of these methods including human hybridoma; EBV transformation; non-immortalized B cell culture; clonal sorting; and combinatorial display. Key considerations used in the comparison of different methods includes: efficiency of interrogation of an individual's entire repertoire; assay formats that can be used to screen for antibodies of interest (i.e., binding versus biological assays); and the ability to recover native antibody heavy and light chain pairs.
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.