Characterization of antibodies that inhibit HIV gp120 antigen processing and presentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antibodies to the CD4-binding site (CD4bs) of HIV-1 envelope gp120 have been shown to inhibit MHC class II presentation of this antigen, but the mechanism is not fully understood. To define the key determinants contributing to the inhibitory activity of these antibodies, a panel of anti-CD4bs monoclonal antibodies with different affinities was studied and compared to antibodies specific for the chemokine receptor-binding site or other gp120 regions. Anti-CD4bs antibodies that completely obstruct gp120 presentation exhibit three common properties: relatively high affinity for gp120, acid-stable interaction with gp120, and the capacity to slow the kinetics of gp120 proteolytic processing. None of these antibodies prevents gp120 internalization into APC. Notably, the broadly virus-neutralizing anti-CD4bs IgG1b12 does not block gp120 presentation as strongly, because although IgG1b12 has a relatively high affinity, it dissociates from gp120 more readily at acidic pH and only moderately retards gp120 proteolysis. Other anti-gp120 antibodies, regardless of their affinities, do not affect gp120 presentation. Hence, high-affinity anti-CD4bs antibodies that do not dissociate from gp120 at endolysosomal pH obstruct gp120 processing and prevent MHC class II presentation of this antigen. The presence of such antibodies could contribute to the dearth of anti-gp120 T helper responses in chronically HIV-1-infected patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".