Interaction with Cellular CD4 Exposes HIV-1 Envelope Epitopes Targeted by Antibody-Dependent Cell-Mediated Cytotoxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Anti-HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein (Env) antibodies without broadly neutralizing activity correlated with protection in the RV144 clinical trial, stimulating interest in other protective mechanisms involving antibodies, such as antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC). Env epitopes targeted by many antibodies effective at mediating ADCC are poorly exposed on the unliganded Env trimer. Here we investigated the mechanism of exposure of ADCC epitopes on Env and showed that binding of Env and CD4 within the same HIV-1-infected cell effectively exposes these epitopes. Env capacity to transit to the CD4-bound conformation is required for ADCC epitope exposure. Importantly, cell surface CD4 downregulation by Nef and Vpu accessory proteins and Vpu-mediated BST-2 antagonism modulate exposure of ADCC-mediating epitopes and reduce the susceptibility of infected cells to this effector function in vitro. Significantly, Env conformational changes induced by cell surface CD4 are conserved among Env from HIV-1 and HIV-2/SIVmac lineages. Altogether, our observations describe a highly conserved mechanism required to expose ADCC epitopes that might help explain the evolutionary advantage of downregulation of cell surface CD4 by the HIV-1 Vpu and Nef proteins. IMPORTANCE: HIV-1 envelope epitopes targeted by many antibodies effective at mediating antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) are poorly exposed on the unliganded envelope trimer. Here we investigated the mechanism of exposure of these epitopes and found that envelope interaction with the HIV-1 CD4 receptor is required to expose some of these epitopes. Moreover, our results suggest that HIV-1 CD4 downregulation might help avoid the killing of HIV-1-infected cells by this immune mechanism.
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".