The early immune response to HIV-1 infection is likely to be an important factor in determining the clinical course of disease. Recent data indicate that the HIV-1 quasispecies that arise following a mucosal infection are usually derived from a single transmitted virus. Moreover, the finding that the first effective immune responses drive the selection of virus escape mutations provides insight into the earliest immune responses against the transmitted virus and their contributions to the control of acute viraemia. Strong innate and adaptive immune responses occur subsequently but they are too late to eliminate the infection. In this Review, we discuss recent studies on the kinetics and quality of early immune responses to HIV-1 and their implications for developing a successful preventive HIV-1 vaccine.
The early immune response to HIV-1 infection is likely to be an important factor in determining the clinical course of disease. Recent data indicate that the HIV-1 quasispecies that arise following a mucosal infection are usually derived from a single transmitted virus. Moreover, the finding that the first effective immune responses drive the selection of virus escape mutations provides insight into the earliest immune responses against the transmitted virus and their contributions to the control of acute viraemia. Strong innate and adaptive immune responses occur subsequently but they are too late to eliminate the infection. In this Review, we discuss recent studies on the kinetics and quality of early immune responses to HIV-1 and their implications for developing a successful preventive HIV-1 vaccine.
Recent advances that enable the identification of patients within the first few weeks of HIV-1 infection[1,2] have provided researchers access to samples from acutely infectedpatients earlier and in higher numbers than previously available. This has advanced our understanding of the nature of the transmitted virus and the first immune responses in the period before establishment of stable viraemia (the viral set point), which occurs 3–6 months after infection. The first weeks following HIV-1 transmission are extremely dynamic: they are associated with rapid damage to generative immune cell microenvironments, caused by direct viral cytopathicity and bystander effects, and with immune responses that partially control the virus.In this Review, we focus our discussion on the early host or viral factors that are crucial for determining the outcome of HIV-1 infection. These include the nature of the transmitted virus, or founder virus, suppression of the initial infection by genetically influenced immune responses, and the rate of virus mutation and viral fitness of selected mutants. In addition, we review what is known about the nature of innate and adaptive immune responses during this early phase of infection, drawn from studies of humans and macaques infected with HIV-1 and simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV), respectively. Finally, we discuss how our knowledge of the events of early HIV-1 infection can improve the design of a preventive vaccine (Box 1).The biology of early HIV-1 infectionMost HIV-1 infections occur by sexual exposure through the genital tract or rectal mucosa. Although it is not possible to study the very first events following HIV-1 transmission in humans in vivo, we have gained some understanding from studies in which mucosal tissue explants were infected in vitro[3,4,5]. Further understanding of the first stages of infection in vivo has been obtained from studies in which macaques were inoculated intrarectally or intravaginally with SIV[6,7]. It is still uncertain whether HIV-1 is transmitted as a free or a cell-bound virus, but SIV can be transmitted in either form[8]. In addition, the mechanism by which HIV-1 crosses the genital mucosal epithelium is unclear. Diffusion of HIV-1 across the vaginal mucosa is slowed by cervicovaginal mucus[9]. It is possible that virus that reaches the mucosal epithelium crosses this barrier by transcytosis or by making direct contact with dendrites of intraepithelial dendritic cells (DCs). Preliminary unpublished findings suggest that virions may also move through intercellular spaces in the epithelium to make initial cell contact with underlying mucosal Langerhans cells and CD4+ T cells (T. Hope and S. McCoombe, personal communication). Given that multiple sexual exposures are usually needed for infection to occur, crossing of the epithelial cell barrier by the virus is probably a rare event, although it is more common if the genital mucosa is damaged by physical trauma or co-existing genital infections[10,11].Following transmission of the virus, there is a period of ∼10 days, known as the eclipse phase, before viral RNA becomes detectable in the plasma (Fig. 1). Single-genome amplification and sequencing of the first detectable virus has shown that ∼80% of mucosally transmitted HIV-1 clade B and C infections are initiated by a single virus[12,13,14]. Infectious molecular clones derived from these primary founder viruses could infect CD4+ T cells with greater efficiency than they could infect monocytes and macrophages[14], which differs from the virus quasispecies that arise later in the infection and can infect lymphoid and myeloid cell types with equal efficiency. Studies in rhesus macaques inoculated intrarectally with a complex SIV quasispecies also showed that productive infection arises from a single infecting virus[15], which supports the use of SIV infection of rhesus macaques as a model for HIV-1 transmission and vaccine studies. In other studies[7,16] in which macaques were infected experimentally, the first cells to be infected in the vaginal mucosa were found in foci of resident memory T cells that expressed the virus receptors CD4 and CC-chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5), which is consistent with the cell tropism of cloned HIV-1 founder virus[14].
Genetic control of HIV-1 set pointIn contrast to other pathogens that have infected and selected humans for millennia, HIV-1 is a new pathogen to humans[45,46,47]. Therefore, the influence of the host's genetics on the immune response to HIV-1 infection may be more evident. The most dramatic finding in this regard is that homozygosity for a 32 base pair deletion in CCR5, which abrogates its expression, protects almost completely from HIV-1 infection[48]. Furthermore, the HLA alleles HLA-B*5701, HLA-B*5703, HLA-B*5801, HLA-B27 and HLA-B51 are all associated with good control of the virus and a slower progression to AIDS[49], partly because the epitopes recognized by the T cells in these individuals are focused on conserved regions of the viral Gag protein (see below). A genome-wide association study[50] found a strong protective influence for a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) located 35 kilobases upstream of the HLA-C locus and confirmed the association of HLA-B57 with a low viral set point. This HLA-C-linked SNP may be associated with low-level expression of HLA-C[50], which might in turn affect T cell or natural killer (NK) cell function during HIV-1 infection. By contrast, some subtypes of HLA-B35 are associated with rapid disease progression, especially if homozygous[51], although the mechanism is not understood.It has been shown that the expression of the killer immunoglobulin-like receptors KIR3DS1 and KIR3DL1 — which deliver activating and inhibitory signals to NK cells, respectively — delays progression to AIDS in individuals with HLA class I allotypes containing the 80Ile variant of the Bw4 motif[52], which are thought to be ligands for these receptors[53,54]. Expansion of NK cells that express KIR3DS1 and/or KIR3DL1 during acute HIV-1 infection has been observed but only if the HLA-BBw4 80Ile motif is present[55], which is supported by in vitro data demonstrating that NK cells expressing KIR3DS1 control HIV-1 replication efficiently in HLA-BBw4 80Ile-expressing target cells[56]. It is possible that KIR3DS1 mediates specific recognition of HIV-infected cells by NK cells, although the exact nature of the ligand is elusive. These observations probably reflect an influence of interactions between KIR3DS1 and/or KIR3DL1 and HLA-BBw4 80Ile on the development and/or functions of NK cells, and possibly CD8+ T cells, which may help to control viral set point.Early innate immune responses to HIV-1Insight into the earliest systemic immune responses to HIV-1 infection has been gained by studying plasma donors who acquired HIV-1 infection. Frequent samples were taken before infection, through peak viraemia and seroconversion[57,58]. Samples from different donors were aligned relative to the time that viral RNA was first detectable (100 copies per ml) (T0). The first detectable innate immune response, occurring sometimes just before T0, was an increase in the levels of some acute-phase proteins, such as serum amyloid A (H. Kramer and B. Kessler, personal communication). A further wave of acute-phase protein production coincided with a cytokine response (described below) and a rapid increase in plasma viraemia. The production of acute-phase proteins can be triggered by pro-inflammatory cytokines (such as interleukin-1 (IL-1)) and also by extrinsic factors such as lipopolysaccharide (LPS). LPS is detectable in the plasma during chronic infection with HIV-1 or SIV and may be derived from commensal bacteria that translocate from the gut lumen following depletion of HIV-1-infected intestinal CCR5+
T helper 17 cells[21,22,59]. Immunostaining of GALT biopsies collected from acutely infectedpatients showed higher levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines than healthy tissues[60].As viraemia increases, so do the levels of cytokines and chemokines in the plasma (Fig. 3). Levels of IL-15, type I interferons (IFNs) and CXC-chemokine ligand 10 (CXCL10) increase rapidly but transiently. IL-18, TNF, IFNγ and IL-22 also increase rapidly but are sustained at high levels, whereas the increase in IL-10 is slightly delayed[58] (Fig. 3). Some of these cytokines have antiviral activity; for example, type I IFNs inhibit HIV replication in severe combined immunodeficientmice reconstituted with human lymphocytes[61]. Also, type I IFNs, IL-15 and IL-18 enhance innate and adaptive immune responses. However, the intense cytokine response during acute HIV infection may also promote viral replication and mediate immunopathology (discussed below).
Early T cell selection of virus escape mutations in acute HIV-1 infection.
The virus escape mutations occurring in a single representative patient during acute HIV-1 infection. The changes in plasma virus load (a) and the emergence of amino acid changes (b) are shown. At the first time point, when the patient was virus positive but seronegative (Fiebig stage II), the founder virus (which was clade B) showed no evidence of immune selection. Thereafter there is an increasing number of selected sites at which the founder virus sequence is completely altered by, usually a cluster of, amino acid changes. Those marked in red were selected early (within 50 days from peak viraemia) by demonstrable CD8+ T cell responses. Those in purple were selected later by CD8+ T cells. Those in light green are single amino acid reversions to the clade B virus consensus sequence. Those in blue were mutations in V1 and V3 of the env gene selected by neutralizing antibodies. Those in grey were selected through undefined means, possibly by T cells, natural killer cells or antibodies. Yellow represents changes that co-varied with another mutation. LTR, long terminal repeat. Figure is based on data from Ref. 75.
Early T cell selection of virus escape mutations in acute HIV-1 infection.
The virus escape mutations occurring in a single representative patient during acute HIV-1 infection. The changes in plasma virus load (a) and the emergence of amino acid changes (b) are shown. At the first time point, when the patient was virus positive but seronegative (Fiebig stage II), the founder virus (which was clade B) showed no evidence of immune selection. Thereafter there is an increasing number of selected sites at which the founder virus sequence is completely altered by, usually a cluster of, amino acid changes. Those marked in red were selected early (within 50 days from peak viraemia) by demonstrable CD8+ T cell responses. Those in purple were selected later by CD8+ T cells. Those in light green are single amino acid reversions to the clade B virus consensus sequence. Those in blue were mutations in V1 and V3 of the env gene selected by neutralizing antibodies. Those in grey were selected through undefined means, possibly by T cells, natural killer cells or antibodies. Yellow represents changes that co-varied with another mutation. LTR, long terminal repeat. Figure is based on data from Ref. 75.The earliest T cell responses are often specific for Env and Nef[75,87]. Responses to other viral proteins, including the conserved Gagp24 and Pol proteins, tended to arise during later waves of T cell responses and may be more important for maintaining the viral load at the set point than for controlling early viraemia[75,87,88]. Often, the first T cell responses decline rapidly when the escape mutations are selected, or they may decline through exhaustion[75,87]. The loss of T cells after virus mutation implies complete loss of the epitope and no tendency for the virus to revert to the original sequence because of loss of fitness.The finding that escape mutants appeared so rapidly raises questions regarding the effectiveness of the early T cell response. A mathematical model has provided some answers[75]. The rapid loss of the founder virus sequence and its replacement by escape mutant viruses implies complete CD8+ T cell-mediated inhibition of virus production by infected cells. From the rate of loss of founder virus sequence, the fraction of cells killed per day was calculated to be 0.15–0.35 for the earliest T cell responses[75]. As a virus-infected cell has a lifespan of 1 day in vivo, this means that 15–35% of infected cells must be killed prematurely by a single T cell response, which must reduce virus production. Therefore, CD8+ T cells curb viraemia in acute HIV-1 infection. However, selection of escape mutants would minimize this beneficial effect if the mutants were as fit as the founder virus and if the earliest responses were not immediately succeeded by new T cell responses to new (mutated) epitopes, which in turn may select further escape mutants[75] (Fig. 4). Ultimately, responding T cells target epitopes that are more highly conserved and in which escape occurs at a cost to the fitness of the virus. Such immunodominant responses to more highly conserved epitopes are more likely to result in a lower level of viraemia at the set point[89]. When a virus that has undergone such escape mutations is transmitted, its set point is also lower in the new host[90]. The level of set point viraemia is therefore influenced by the nature of the transmitted virus and the specificity of early CD8+ T cell responses. Immunodominant T cell responses to the more conserved immunodominant virus epitopes are likely to result in a lower viral set point[89].CD8+ T cells are also important for the maintenance of viral set point. There have been many reports of virus escape mutations from around the time the set point is reached[30,32,84,85,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99]. Using the same mathematical models as described earlier, CD8+ T cells are thought to make only a small contribution (killing 4–6% of virus-infected cells per day) to infected-cell death during chronic infection[100], the rest being due to virus cytopathicity or infected-cell activation. However, this may be an underestimate of the T cell contribution because of the fitness costs of the escape mutations on the virus, such that mutant viruses grow more slowly than the founder virus. Some of the epitopes that are recognized by the T cells during later stages of infection are so highly conserved that the virus must undergo compensating mutations at other sites for escape to occur[75,94,97,98,101], which slows the outgrowth of the mutant viruses. The calculation is further confounded by the difficulty of simultaneous virus escape from more than one T cell response[13,85,91]. In contrast to the earliest stages of HIV-1 infection when the range of epitopes recognized by the T cell response is narrow, the later response is broad, often directed against more than 10 epitopes[102]. Responses to conserved epitopes are probably important in the long-term control of viral load, because patients with HLA-B27, HLA-B*5701, HLA-B*5703 or HLA-B*5801 that do well clinically have CD8+ T cells that recognize less-variable regions of the virus, particularly in Gag. The HIV-1 quasispecies in these patients do escape slowly during long-term infection, but each escape mutant incurs a proved fitness cost to the virus[101]. The time it takes for the first T cell responses to become targeted to conserved epitopes might be important in determining long-term control of viral infection[75,88,99]. It is not clear what features determine which CD8+ T cell epitopes will become immunodominant; it is clear that HLA type is important, but the precursor frequency of naive T cells that are specific for HIV proteins is also likely to be a factor that is probably influenced both by genetics and a history of previous (cross-reactive) antigen exposure. Vaccines could influence this.+ HIV-1 infects and significantly depletes memory CD4+ T cells[25,79], and HIV-1-specific CD4+ T cells are particularly susceptible to HIV-1 infection[103]. CD4+ T cell responses to HIV proteins have always been difficult to show, and there is a disparity between the measurements of CD4+ T cell responses to antigen when observing cytokine production versus proliferation[104]. Nevertheless, several epitopes for CD4+ T cells have been identified, particularly in Gag[105]. Expansion of HIV-specific CD4+ T cell responses occurs in acute HIV-1 infection, but such responses decline rapidly[106,107]; although, very early administration of ART, to control viraemia and prevent the killing of CD4+ T cells, can rescue strong HIV-1CD4+ T cell responses[108,109]. However, even with the probably suboptimal help from the weakened CD4+ T cell repertoire, the first CD8+ T cell responses are strong, although their progression into long-term memory cells could be impaired. The rapid decline of CD8+ T cell responses observed after the founder epitope is eliminated from the virus in the plasma, owing to escape mutations[75], is consistent with the impaired long-term CD8+ T cell memory that has been observed in a model in which mice were depleted of CD4+ T cells[110].The findings described above suggest a role for CD8+ T cells in the earliest immune control of acute HIV-1 infection. CD8+ T cells develop abnormally[111] and become dysfunctional as HIV-1 infection progresses (reviewed in Ref. 112), but the early HIV-1-specific CD8+ T cell response seems to be functionally normal[109] (G. Ferrari, personal communication). Although not all the factors that contribute to a low virus set point and good long-term prognosis (without ART) are known, it is clear that CD8+ T cells are important components. If a vaccine cannot completely prevent infection, there should be a benefit from stimulating appropriate CD8+ T cell responses, as shown recently in the macaque SIV model[113]. An effective vaccine would need to stimulate CD8+ T cell responses to multiple epitopes, especially to those that are highly conserved. It would also be favourable to stimulate a broad T cell response that recognizes common variants of the founder virus epitope sequence, which would limit escape options[114,115].Antibody responses during acute HIV-1 infectionAntibodies that neutralize autologous virus develop slowly, arising ∼12 weeks or longer after HIV-1 transmission[116,117,118]. Antibodies that show some degree of neutralization of heterologous virus eventually arise in ∼20% of patients years after infection[117,119,120]. To determine the specificity and kinetics of antibody production after HIV-1 transmission and to understand why broadly reactive neutralizing antibodies are not made during acute HIV infection, it is important to study the earliest B cell responses to the transmitted virus[117,118].Env-specific antibody responses to autologous, consensus Env epitopes were determined in the same plasma donor cohort as described earlier for innate immunity[57]. The first detectable B cell response was found to occur 8 days after T0 in the form of immune complexes, whereas the first free antibody in the plasma was specific for Env glycoprotein (gp)41 and appeared 13 days after T0. By contrast, the appearance of Envgp120-specific antibodies was delayed an additional 14 days, as was the production of other non-neutralizing Env-specific antibodies[57,118,121,122,123] (Fig. 5; Table 1). The first HIV-1-specific IgA responses in mucosal secretions, which were detected within the first 3 weeks after T0, also recognized gp41 during acute HIV infection (N. L. Yates and G.D.T., unpublished observations). A study that applied mathematical modelling to early viral dynamics indicated that the initial gp41-specific IgG and IgM responses did not significantly affect the early dynamics of plasma viral load[57]. These acute gp41- and gp120-specific antibodies did not select escape mutations, indicating that these early arising antibodies are ineffective against HIV-1. Similar analyses of the effect of the initial immune complexes and gp41-specific IgA responses on viral dynamics are needed to understand the interplay between the initial host antibody responses and virus replication. It is not known why the initial antibody response to Env is non-neutralizing; it may relate to the immunodominance of denatured or non-functional Env forms[124,125]. The first antibodies to induce escape mutants are autologous-virus-neutralizing antibodies that develop ∼12 or more weeks after transmission (Table 1). Fc receptor (FcR)-mediated and complement-associated anti-HIV effector functions have also been reported during primary infection[126,127,128]; however, further studies are required to define their role and capacity to select escape mutations.
Figure 5
Composite alignment of the earliest innate and adaptive immune responses detected after HIV-1 transmission.
The first systemically detectable immune responses to HIV-1 infection are the increases in levels of acute-phase proteins in the plasma, which are observed when virus replication is still largely restricted to the mucosal tissues and draining lymph nodes (eclipse phase). When virus is first detected in the plasma (T0), broad and dynamic increases in plasma cytokine levels are also observed. Within days, as plasma viraemia is still increasing exponentially, the first antibody–virus immune complexes are detected. Expansion of the earliest HIV-1-specific CD8+ T cell responses also commences prior to peak viraemia, followed by detection of the first free glycoprotein (gp)41-specific but non-neutralizing IgM antibodies. Complete virus escape from the first CD8+ T cell responses can occur rapidly, within 10 days of T cell expansion. By this time, viral reservoirs exist, possibly becoming established within days of infection. The earliest autologous-virus-neutralizing antibodies are detected around day 80 following infection, as viral loads are still declining prior to the onset of the viral set point. Antibody escape virus mutants emerge in the plasma within the following week.
Table 1
Env-specific antibody responses in acute HIV-1 infection
Antibody specificity
Time of onset after transmission (days)
gp41
23
gp120
38
Non-neutralizing to CD4-binding site, MPER and CD4-inducible epitopes
40–70
Autologous-virus neutralizing antibodies
Earliest ∼84
Broad-specificity and neutralizing to CD4-binding site, carbohydrate and MPER
Not usually made, but when they are they arise ∼30 months after transmission in chronic infection
Composite alignment of the earliest innate and adaptive immune responses detected after HIV-1 transmission.
The first systemically detectable immune responses to HIV-1 infection are the increases in levels of acute-phase proteins in the plasma, which are observed when virus replication is still largely restricted to the mucosal tissues and draining lymph nodes (eclipse phase). When virus is first detected in the plasma (T0), broad and dynamic increases in plasma cytokine levels are also observed. Within days, as plasma viraemia is still increasing exponentially, the first antibody–virus immune complexes are detected. Expansion of the earliest HIV-1-specific CD8+ T cell responses also commences prior to peak viraemia, followed by detection of the first free glycoprotein (gp)41-specific but non-neutralizing IgM antibodies. Complete virus escape from the first CD8+ T cell responses can occur rapidly, within 10 days of T cell expansion. By this time, viral reservoirs exist, possibly becoming established within days of infection. The earliest autologous-virus-neutralizing antibodies are detected around day 80 following infection, as viral loads are still declining prior to the onset of the viral set point. Antibody escape virus mutants emerge in the plasma within the following week.Env-specific antibody responses in acute HIV-1 infectionThe range of epitopes bound by the first (specific to autologous virus) neutralizing antibodies in HIV-1 clade C infection is narrow and epitopes are often restricted to certain virus isolates[129]. Similar to infections with clade B HIV-1, the initial autologous-virus-neutralizing antibodies induced in clade C infections are induced with similar kinetics and are usually specific only for the initially transmitted Env variant[116,117]. Although the autologous-virus-neutralizing antibody response can control the virus quasispecies present when these antibodies appear in infections with HIV-1 clade B or C viruses, the narrowness of the response allows rapid viral escape[116,117] (K. Bar and G. Shaw, personal communication).Interestingly, antibodies specific for the conserved regions of HIV-1Env — such as the carbohydrate epitope recognized by the unique broad-specificity neutralizing monoclonal antibody 2G12 (Ref. 130), the CD4-binding site recognized by the monoclonal antibody 1b12 (Ref. 131) and the membrane-proximal region recognized by the monoclonal antibodies 2F5, Z13 and 4E10 (Refs 132, 133, 134 — are rarely generated during HIV-1 infection; when they do occur, they develop only after ∼20–30 months of infection[57,119,120,135]. These observations indicate that both genetic factors and maturation of the antibody response to HIV-1 are necessary for the generation of this rare, late, broad-specificity, neutralizing antibody response. Affinity maturation through somatic hypermutation may be crucial for the generation of these neutralizing antibodies and may be delayed because of impaired CD4+ T cell help. Because the 2F5, 4E10 and 1b12 monoclonal antibodies have long hydrophobic complementarity-determining region 3 (CDR3) sequences and show polyreactivity for autologous molecules, it has been suggested that B cell regulatory mechanisms such as self tolerance may control their production[136].Acute HIV-1 infection profoundly affects blood and tissue B cells[123]. HIV-1 induces early class switching in polyclonal B cells and is associated with marked increases in the number of blood and tissue memory B cells and plasma cells, as well as a decrease in the number of naive B cells[123]. In the mucosal B cell inductive microenvironments, such as Peyer's patches, where HIV and SIV replicate at high levels during acute infection[137,138,139], both HIV-1 (Refs 123, 139) and SIV[140] can induce the lysis of follicular B cells, massive B cell apoptosis and loss of ∼50% of germinal centres within the first 80 days of infection. Early loss of germinal centres may result in defects in the ability to rapidly generate high-affinity HIV-1 antibodies and lead to a delay in the induction of autologous-virus-neutralizing antibodies.The finding that the generation of potentially protective antibodies is delayed until after initial control of viraemia ∼12 weeks after transmission and then focused on only a few epitopes implies that it will be important to develop a vaccine that primes a very early and broad antibody response that targets multiple neutralizing epitopes for effective control of early viral expansion; the natural process is too little, too late. The early perturbations to B cells by the virus similarly indicate the need for a vaccine that either has high levels of durable protective antibody responses or primes in order to induce a rapid secondary response. The rarity of broad-specificity, neutralizing antibody responses to conserved epitopes in Env emphasizes the need to search for and find those small B cell subsets that can make broad-specificity, neutralizing antibodies: immunogens and adjuvants are needed that target those specific B cells.OutlookA clear picture of the earliest immune responses to HIV-1 (Fig. 5) has major implications for HIV-1 prevention in general and for vaccine design. After transmission, there is probably only a 5–10 day window during the eclipse phase in which the virus-infected cells could be eradicated, before the virus spreads widely and integrates to generate long-lasting and non-eradicable reservoirs of latent virus. True sterilizing immunity can be attained only if the virus is prevented from infecting any host cells. This could be achieved only through broad-specificity neutralizing antibodies that are already present in the plasma and at mucosal sites before virus transmission. In support of this hypothesis, it has been shown that local application, or intravenous injection, of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies against SIV in macaques is protective against subsequent challenge with the virus[141,142,143,144].If neutralizing antibodies cannot be generated in sufficient quantity, affinity and breadth, other immune mechanisms could abort the infection by attacking the founder virus and/or the first infected cells. CD8+ T cell-mediated killing, antibody-mediated mechanisms dependent on FcRs (including antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC)), NK cell-mediated lysis and β-chemokine release all have the potential to prevent early infection. However, to prevent infection these effector mechanisms would have to be ready primed, as there is not time to activate and expand central memory CD8+ T cells[145], for example, before chronic infection is established.Harnessing NK cells and NKT cells might be an effective strategy to control the increase of virally infected cells during the eclipse phase or during the increase in viraemia of early HIV-1 infection. Although it may be hazardous to induce chronic hyperactivation of these cells as a means to inhibit virus infection, it may be possible to immunize subjects with HIV-1 antigens such as peptides that specifically expand potentially protective NK and NKT cell subpopulations, thereby altering the cell repertoire to contain a higher proportion of protective NK cells[76,77].The modest protection offered by the vaccines used in the recent RV144 clinical trial carried out in Thailand with volunteers at low risk of HIV-1 infection[146] (Box 1) may be an example of weak immune responses combining to raise the threshold for infection — a rare event.Once infection starts to spread, enhancing the natural containment processes might be the only immunological option to benefit infected individuals. CD8+ T cell responses, which are clearly effective in reducing the peak viraemia during acute infection, could be enhanced through vaccination by increasing their breadth of epitope recognition so that, rather than mediating sequential responses to single epitopes, there would be a simultaneous multi-epitope-specific CD8+ T cell response to the virus[113,147,148]. Focusing this response on conserved epitopes, for which escape incurs a fitness cost to the virus, would be desirable. Strategies for enhancing or preserving CD4+ T cell help would also be of benefit for supporting the CD8+ T cells. However, it is important to recognize that CD8+ T cells are highly sensitive to single amino acid variation in epitope peptides[75,149], so even minor mismatches between vaccine-encoded epitopes and viral epitopes could be a serious problem and could diminish the effectiveness of any vaccine-stimulated T cell response.If a vaccine can induce greater breadth in early T and B cell responses to HIV-1 than occurs naturally during acute infection, then the use of a combination of protective epitopes in a preventative vaccine may control the early dissemination of HIV-1, resulting in a lower viral set point and better long-term immune control. Preliminary unpublished results with experimental vaccines that include multiple common variants of HIV-1 proteins such as Gag (mosaic vaccines) have been shown to enhance the breadth and magnitude of T cell responses in animal studies[150,151,152]. This approach and other novel strategies for expanding the breadth of induced Env-specific B cell responses are also central to improving the prospects of vaccine success.It can be thought to be good news that most HIV-1 transmissions that result in productive infection are mediated by only one virion, indicating a vulnerability of the virus to immune attack during the eclipse phase. This suggests that a well-designed vaccine strategy might have a chance of achieving good (if not perfect) control around the time of acute peak viraemia, preventing the onset of damaging chronic immune activation and damage to generative immune cell environments. However, vaccine strategies must be developed that potentiate what is clearly a qualitatively and quantitatively insufficient immune response in the first few weeks of HIV-1 infection. It is hoped that both the innate and adaptive arms of the immune system can be harnessed to develop an HIV-1 vaccine that ensures that adequate immune protection is in place before transmission, enabling earlier, broader and more effective secondary responses for preventing or controlling acute HIV-1 infection.All attempts to make a vaccine against HIV-1 have failed. Three vaccine approaches have been tested in clinical trials for efficacy. The AIDSVAX glycoprotein (gp)120 vaccine stimulated the production of non-neutralizing antibody to the virus envelope proteins and failed to protect vaccinated individuals from infection[153]. The STEP vaccine, comprised of three recombinant attenuated adenovirus serotype 5 viruses expressing HIV-1Gag, Pol and Nef, stimulated CD8+ T cell responses to the viral proteins but again showed no protective effect[154,155]. Similar virus vector-based vaccines have been shown to stimulate simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV)-specific CD8+ T cell responses in rhesus macaques, and an adenovirus serotype 5 vector expressing Gag protected against challenge with a chimeric SIV–HIV (SHIV89.6p) virus but was not protective against challenge with the more natural SIVmac239 (Ref. 156). More recent data show that recombinant vaccines that stimulate much broader and stronger CD8+ T cell responses can partially protect against SIVmac239 and SIVmac251 virus challenge, resulting in more attenuated infection with low virus load and prolonged survival of rhesus macaques[113,157].A third efficacy trial, in Thailand using a canary pox viral vector expressing gp120, Gag and Pol to prime immune responses followed by the AIDSVAX gp120 vaccine to boost the immune response, has been reported recently[146]. This showed for the first time a small protective effect, with 30% fewer vaccine recipients becoming infected with HIV-1 than controls; the result was statistically significant in one of the three analyses made. The volunteer cohort was low risk (annual incidence of infection ∼0.3%) and this may be relevant as it may be easier to protect such people than those at high risk. It is not clear whether protection was mediated by antibody, T cells, innate cells or some combination of the three, but those who did become infected did not have reduced virus levels, which is usually seen for protection mediated by T cells in SIV models[113,157].There is a general consensus in the field that future vaccine approaches should be less empirical and that a deeper understanding of the earliest immune responses to HIV-1 and SIV infection is needed. It will also be important to understand why broad-specificity, neutralizing antibodies are not routinely induced and to determine ways to safely induce them, and to identify what immune responses lead to a better outcome — as in the rare individuals, known as 'elite controllers', who successfully control HIV-1 infection for decades without needing antiretroviral drug therapy[158,159].
Authors: Elin S Gray; Maphuti C Madiga; Penny L Moore; Koleka Mlisana; Salim S Abdool Karim; James M Binley; George M Shaw; John R Mascola; Lynn Morris Journal: J Virol Date: 2009-08-19 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Punnee Pitisuttithum; Peter Gilbert; Marc Gurwith; William Heyward; Michael Martin; Fritz van Griensven; Dale Hu; Jordan W Tappero; Kachit Choopanya Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2006-11-03 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Nancy Gasper-Smith; Deanna M Crossman; John F Whitesides; Nadia Mensali; Janet S Ottinger; Steven G Plonk; M Anthony Moody; Guido Ferrari; Kent J Weinhold; Sara E Miller; Charles F Reich; Li Qin; Stephen G Self; George M Shaw; Thomas N Denny; Laura E Jones; David S Pisetsky; Barton F Haynes Journal: J Virol Date: 2008-05-28 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Jesus F Salazar-Gonzalez; Maria G Salazar; Brandon F Keele; Gerald H Learn; Elena E Giorgi; Hui Li; Julie M Decker; Shuyi Wang; Joshua Baalwa; Matthias H Kraus; Nicholas F Parrish; Katharina S Shaw; M Brad Guffey; Katharine J Bar; Katie L Davis; Christina Ochsenbauer-Jambor; John C Kappes; Michael S Saag; Myron S Cohen; Joseph Mulenga; Cynthia A Derdeyn; Susan Allen; Eric Hunter; Martin Markowitz; Peter Hraber; Alan S Perelson; Tanmoy Bhattacharya; Barton F Haynes; Bette T Korber; Beatrice H Hahn; George M Shaw Journal: J Exp Med Date: 2009-06-01 Impact factor: 14.307
Authors: Paul A Goepfert; Wendy Lumm; Paul Farmer; Philippa Matthews; Andrew Prendergast; Jonathan M Carlson; Cynthia A Derdeyn; Jianming Tang; Richard A Kaslow; Anju Bansal; Karina Yusim; David Heckerman; Joseph Mulenga; Susan Allen; Philip J R Goulder; Eric Hunter Journal: J Exp Med Date: 2008-04-21 Impact factor: 14.307
Authors: Lela Kardava; Susan Moir; Wei Wang; Jason Ho; Clarisa M Buckner; Jacqueline G Posada; Marie A O'Shea; Gregg Roby; Jenny Chen; Hae Won Sohn; Tae-Wook Chun; Susan K Pierce; Anthony S Fauci Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Jaclyn K Wright; Zabrina L Brumme; Boris Julg; Mary van der Stok; Zenele Mncube; Xiaojiang Gao; Jonathan M Carlson; Philip J R Goulder; Bruce D Walker; Mark A Brockman; Thumbi Ndung'u Journal: J Virol Date: 2011-11-16 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Barbara C Bachler; Michael Humbert; Brisa Palikuqi; Nagadenahalli B Siddappa; Samir K Lakhashe; Robert A Rasmussen; Ruth M Ruprecht Journal: J Virol Date: 2013-02-06 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Cynthia L Gay; Sarah J Willis; Anna B Cope; JoAnn D Kuruc; Kara S McGee; Joe Sebastian; Amanda M Crooks; Mehri S McKellar; David M Margolis; Susan A Fiscus; Charles B Hicks; Guido Ferrari; Joseph J Eron Journal: AIDS Date: 2016-11-28 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Yin Xu; Chris Weatherall; Michelle Bailey; Sheilajen Alcantara; Robert De Rose; Jerome Estaquier; Kim Wilson; Kazuo Suzuki; Jacques Corbeil; David A Cooper; Stephen J Kent; Anthony D Kelleher; John Zaunders Journal: J Virol Date: 2013-01-16 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Fredrik Barrenas; Robert E Palermo; Brian Agricola; Michael B Agy; Lauri Aicher; Victoria Carter; Leon Flanary; Richard R Green; Randy McLain; Qingsheng Li; Wuxun Lu; Robert Murnane; Xinxia Peng; Matthew J Thomas; Jeffrey M Weiss; David M Anderson; Michael G Katze Journal: J Virol Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 5.103