Epigenetic control of IRF1 responses in HIV-exposed seronegative versus HIV-susceptible individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Not all individuals exposed to HIV become infected. Understanding why these HIV-exposed seronegative individuals remain uninfected will help inform the development of preventative measures against HIV infection. Interferon regulatory factor-1 (IRF1) plays a critical role both in host antiviral immunity and in HIV-1 replication. This study examined IRF1 expression regulation in the ex vivo peripheral blood mononuclear cells of HIV-exposed seronegative commercial sex workers who can be epidemiologically defined as relatively resistant to HIV infection (HIV-R), versus HIV-uninfected, susceptible controls (HIV-S). Whereas HIV-susceptible individuals demonstrated a biphasic, prolonged increase in IRF1 expression after interferon-γ stimulation, HIV-R individuals demonstrated a robust, but transient response. We also found that the IRF1 promoter in HIV-R was primed by increased basal histone deacetylase-2 binding, independently of transcription regulators, STAT1 and nuclear factor-κB/p65, implicating an epigenetic silencing mechanism. Interestingly, the transitory IRF1 response in HIV-R was sufficient in comparable regulation of interleukin-12 and interleukin-4 expression compared with the HIV-susceptible controls. This is the first study characterizing IRF1 responsiveness in individuals who demonstrate altered susceptibility to HIV infection. These data suggest that transitory IRF1 responsiveness in HIV-R may be one of the key contributors to the altered susceptibility to HIV infection during the early stages of primary HIV 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".