Comparison of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-Specific Infection-Enhancing and -Inhibiting Antibodies in AIDS Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The humoral immune response of the human host against the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 (HIV-1) envelope glycoproteins comprises virus-neutralizing antibodies (NAs), antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity-mediating (ADCC) antibodies, and infection-enhancing antibodies (IEAs). Because of their potential significance for the outcome of infection with this virus, we have studied the relative prevalence of NAs, ADCC antibodies, and IEAs in the sera of patients infected with HIV. Our results demonstrate that while >or=60% of serum samples are positive for NAs or ADCC antibodies, 72% of these serum samples mediate the enhancement of infection in the presence of complement. In patients with low CD4 counts, NA and ADCC antibody levels tend to decrease, while IEA levels increase. A significant positive correlation was found only between the presence of ADCC antibodies and the presence of antibodies that neutralized HIV-1 in the presence of complement. These results show that the anti-HIV-1 humoral immune response consists of a mixture of antibodies that may inhibit or enhance HIV infection and whose ratios may vary in different stages of the infection.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".