Distribution and functional analysis of memory antiviral CD8 T cell responses in HIV-1 and cytomegalovirus infections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, we have investigated the anatomic distribution and the function of different populations of HIV-1- and cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific memory CD8 T cells. The different populations of virus-specific memory CD8 T cells were distinguished on the basis of the expression of CD45RA and CCR7, and the composition of HIV-1- and CMV-specific memory CD8 T cell pools were compared in subjects with chronic HIV-1 and CMV co-infection. The distribution of HIV-1-specific CD8 T cells was similar between blood and lymph node. However, CMV-specific CD8 T cells were accumulated predominantly in the blood away from the lymphoid tissue. The majority (>70%) of HIV-1- and CMV-specific CD8 T cells in both blood and lymph node had a phenotype, e.g. CCR7-, typical of effector T cells. HIV-1-specific memory CD8 T cells were mostly (>80%) pre-terminally differentiated cells, e.g. CD45RA-CCR7-, in both blood and lymph node while 30-50% of CMV-specific CD8 T cells were terminally differentiated, e.g. CD45RA+CCR7-. Therefore, consistently with studies in mice, antigen-specific effector memory CD8 T cells accumulate predominantly in the target organ of the pathogen in humans, and the differences in the composition of HIV-1- and CMV-specific CD8 T cell pools were also present in the lymphoid tissue. A substantial proportion (30-40%) of virus-specific CD8+CCR7+ T cells produced IFN-gamma. Thus, indicating that the expression of CCR7 does not provide a clear-cut separation of memory CD8 T cells with distinct functional capacities. Taken together, these results provide further advances in the characterization of human memory CD8 T cells.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".