Enhancing Efficacy of HIV Gag DNA Vaccine by Local Delivery of GM-CSF in Murine and Macaque Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Controlled release of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) protein by albumin-heparin microparticles administered via intramuscular vaccination in conjunction with HIV DNA vaccines stimulated HIV Gag-specific immune responses. In the murine model, Gag-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) and T helper (Th) responses were significantly enhanced by administration of murine GM-CSF microparticles. This effect was comparable to a GM-CSF encoded plasmid. In three of four rhesus monkeys, enhancement of Gag-specific antibody (Ab), Th, and CTL responses was observed 1 month after the first immunization with coadministration of human GM-CSF microparticles and HIV Gag plasmid. The second, third, and fourth booster immunizations, however, did not increase the Gag-specific immune responses. Subsequent application of Gag protein in complete Freund's adjuvant (CFA) significantly enhanced Ab and Th, but not CTL. However, Gag-specific CTL response was triggered by cytokine and Gag p55-encapsulated microparticles in all animals. The strategy of priming immune responses by coadministration of cytokine microparticles and DNA vaccines, followed by boosting with cytokine and antigen protein-encapsulated microparticles, may prove effective in improving an HIV DNA vaccine design.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".