Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29056936›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2017

Are Evolution and the Intracellular Innate Immune System Key Determinants in HIV Transmission?

Rebecca P Sumner, Lucy G Thorne, Doug L Fink, Hataf Khan, Richard S Milne, Greg J Towers

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. HIV envelope tail truncation confers resistance to SERINC5 restriction.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rebecca P SumnerDivision of Infection and Immunity, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Lucy G ThorneDivision of Infection and Immunity, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Doug L FinkDivision of Infection and Immunity, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Hataf KhanDivision of Infection and Immunity, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Richard S MilneDivision of Infection and Immunity, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Greg J TowersDivision of Infection and Immunity, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
University College London · GB

Funding

European Research Council 339223Medical Research Council G0801172Medical Research Council G9721629Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

HIV-1 is the single most important sexually transmitted disease in humans from a global health perspective. Among human lentiviruses, HIV-1 M group has uniquely achieved pandemic levels of human-to-human transmission. The requirement to transmit between hosts likely provides the strongest selective forces on a virus, as without transmission, there can be no new infections within a host population. Our perspective is that evolution of all of the virus-host interactions, which are inherited and perpetuated from host-to-host, must be consistent with transmission. For example, CXCR4 use, which often evolves late in infection, does not favor transmission and is therefore lost when a virus transmits to a new host. Thus, transmission inevitably influences all aspects of virus biology, including interactions with the innate immune system, and dictates the biological niche in which the virus exists in the host. A viable viral niche typically does not select features that disfavor transmission. The innate immune response represents a significant selective pressure during the transmission process. In fact, all viruses must antagonize and/or evade the mechanisms of the host innate and adaptive immune systems that they encounter. We believe that viewing host-virus interactions from a transmission perspective helps us understand the mechanistic details of antiviral immunity and viral escape. This is particularly true for the innate immune system, which typically acts from the very earliest stages of the host-virus interaction, and must be bypassed to achieve successful infection. With this in mind, here we review the innate sensing of HIV, the consequent downstream signaling cascades and the viral restriction that results. The centrality of these mechanisms to host defense is illustrated by the array of countermeasures that HIV deploys to escape them, despite the coding constraint of a 10 kb genome. We consider evasion strategies in detail, in particular the role of the HIV capsid and the viral accessory proteins highlighting important unanswered questions and discussing future perspectives.

Indexed as

capsidcoevolutionHIVinnate immunityrestriction factorssensingtransmissionVpr

Identifiers

PMID29056936
PMCPMC5635324
OpenAlexW2762630094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.