ReviewCurrent opinion in HIV and AIDS2014
Animal models for viral infection and cell exhaustion.
Review in Current opinion in HIV and AIDS, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anti-PD-L1 antibody ASC22 in combination with a histone deacetylase inhibitor chidamide as a "shock and kill" strategy for ART-free virological control: a phase II single-arm study.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2024Trial
- Examining Chronic Inflammation, Immune Metabolism, and T Cell Dysfunction in HIV Infection.Viruses · 2024Review
- The Contributions of Clinical Pharmacology to HIV Cure Research.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2021Review
- The Roles of Coinhibitory Receptors in Pathogenesis of Human Retroviral Infections.Frontiers in immunology · 2018Review
- Coinhibitory Receptor Expression and Immune Checkpoint Blockade: Maintaining a Balance in CD8Frontiers in immunology · 2017Review
- PD-L1 Blockade Differentially Impacts Regulatory T Cells from HIV-Infected Individuals Depending on Plasma Viremia.PLoS pathogens · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewDespite eliciting an early antiviral T cell response, HIV-specific T cells are unable to prevent disease progression, partly because of their loss of effector functions, known as T cell exhaustion. Restoring this T cell functionality represents a critical step for regaining immunological control of HIV-1 replication, and may be fundamental for the development of a functional cure for HIV. In this context, the use of animal models is invaluable for evaluating the efficacy and mechanisms of novel therapeutics aimed at reinvigorating T cell functions. RECENT
findingsAlthough nonhuman primates continue to be a mainstay for studying HIV pathogenesis and therapies, recent advances in humanized mouse models have improved their ability to recapitulate the features of cell exhaustion during HIV infection. Targeting coinhibitory receptors in HIV-infected and simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV)-infected animals has resulted in viral load reductions, presumably by reinvigorating the effector functions of T cells. Additionally, studies combining programmed death-1 (PD-1) blockade with suppressive antiretroviral therapy provide further support to the use of coinhibitory receptor blockades in restoring T cell function by delaying viral load rebound upon antiretroviral therapy interruption. Future in-vivo studies should build on recent in-vitro data, supporting the simultaneous targeting of multiple regulators of cell exhaustion. SUMMARY: In this review, we describe the most recent advances in the use of animal models for the study of cell exhaustion following HIV/SIV infection. These findings suggest that the use of animal models is increasingly critical in translating immunotherapeutics into clinical practice.
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.