Comparative Proliferation Capacity of Gag-C-Specific Naive and Memory CD4+ and CD8+ T Lymphocytes in Rapid, Viremic Slow, and Slow Progressors During Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The exact cause of altered dynamics in T cells compartment during HIV infection remains elusive to date. In this longitudinal study, the proliferation frequency of different T cell subsets was investigated in untreated HIV-1-infected Indian individuals stratified as rapid (R), viremic slow (VS), slow (S) progressors, and healthy controls. Ten healthy and 20 treatment-naive HIV-1-infected individuals were enrolled. Expression of Ki67 nuclear antigen was examined on HIV-specific T cell subsets in peripheral blood lymphocytes. Upon stimulation with HIV-1 Gag-C peptide pools, effector memory (EM) CD4 T cells (R vs. S, EM CD4, p < 0.05) of R progressors proliferated significantly compared with those of S progressors at baseline. However, central memory (CM) CD8 T cell subsets proliferated significantly in VS and S progressors compared with those in R progressors, wherein highest proliferation frequency of EM CD8 T cells was observed. At follow-up visit, the proliferation frequency of naive CD8 T cells was significantly higher in R progressors than S progressors (R vs. S naive CD8, p < 0.05). The findings suggest altered dynamics of different CD4+ and CD8+ T cell subsets in R, VS, and S progressors. The increase in CM T cell proliferation in VS and S progressors could be attributed to slower progression of the HIV infection. Hence, treatment strategies must be focused on restoring the homeostatic balance to restore T cell functionality.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".