CXCR4-Dependent Infection of CD8 <sup>+</sup> , but Not CD4 <sup>+</sup> , Lymphocytes by a Primary Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Isolate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We recently isolated from an infant an X4-syncytium-inducing (SI) human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) variant (92US143-T8) that was able to infect CD8+ lymphocytes independently of CD4. Although it was CD4 independent, the 92US143-T8 isolate also maintained the ability to infect CD4+ cells. In the present study, we investigated the role of CXCR4 in the infection of CD4+ and CD8+ cells by this primary isolate. The expression of CXCR4 was down modulated in CD8+ lymphocytes after infection with the 93US143-T8 isolate. Infection of CD8+ lymphocytes by the 93US143-T8 isolate was prevented by treatment with AMD3100, a specific antagonist for CXCR4, indicating CXCR4-dependent infection. Interestingly, AMD3100 treatment had no inhibitory role in the infection of purified CD4+ lymphocytes by the same isolate. Furthermore, AMD3100 treatment failed to prevent infection of known CD4+ CXCR4+ T-cell lines (MT-2 and CEM) by the 93US143-T8 isolate. In fact, virus replication in the CD4+ cells was often enhanced in the presence of AMD3100. Viruses produced from the infected CD4+ cells in the presence of AMD3100 maintained an unchanged envelope genotype and an SI phenotype. For the first time, these results provide evidence of CXCR4-dependent infection of CD8+ lymphocytes by a primary HIV-1 isolate. This study also shows a different mode of infection for the CD4+ and CD8+ lymphocytes by the same HIV-1 variant. Finally, our findings suggest that a more careful evaluation is necessary before the random use of AMD3100 as a new entry inhibitor in patients harboring SI HIV-1 strains.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".