Mechanisms of protection induced by live attenuated simian immunodeficiency virus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we investigated whether a type of retroviral interference might be one mechanism that mediates the powerful protection induced by live attenuated SIVC8. Our results show that retroviral interference could be demonstrated between SIV and SHIV-HXBc2 in human T-cell lines chronically infected with either SIVC8 or SIVJ5. Lymphocytes from macaques infected with live attenuated SIVC8 were significantly less sensitive (P < 0.05) to in vitro infection by virulent SIVJ5 and SHIV-HXBc2 than were lymphocytes from naive controls. However, this significant difference in the sensitivity of lymphocytes to virus infection was not observed for more efficiently replicating viruses such as SHIVSF33 and SIVsm3. Virus growth was significantly enhanced (P < 0.01) by depletion of CD8+ T-cells, suggesting a role for these cells in the control of SIV replication, both in vitro and in vivo. We found that levels of the beta-chemokines regulated upon activation, normal T-cell expressed and secreted, macrophage inflammatory protein-1alpha and macrophage inflammatory protein-1beta did not correlate with inhibition of virus replication. Taken together, our findings do not support the hypothesis that retroviral interference is the mechanism by which live attenuated SIVC8 induces protection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".