|
The Scientist: NewsBlog:
HIV vaccines: Back to basics?
Posted by Bob Grant [Entry posted at 25th March 2008 10:25 PM GMT]
Rate this article
Return to Top comment: HIV-1 Vaccine Summit: Which Direction from Here? by Jesse Creel [Comment posted 2008-03-31 09:26:09] Below is a commentary of mine which I sent to all the principals of the March 25 HIV-1 Vaccine Summit in advance...Fauci, Greene, Gray, Hoxie, Watkins, DAIDS etc. It puts forth some new avenues of HIV-1 Vaccine development worthy of consideration based on my 23 year reading of the literature.
Thanking You In Advance Jesse Creel Vaccine Research Advocate +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ HIV-1 Vaccine Summit: Which Direction from Here? First let me say I wished all success in the HIV-1 Vaccine Summit on March 25 th, 2008, hosted by DAIDS/NIAID. Following the failure of the Mrk Ad5 STEP trials (60) HIV-1 Vaccine development is searching for which path to follow. With your kind indulgence, below are my thoughts on this. According to the prevailing opinion on HIV-1 protective immunity, a successful HIV-1 Vaccine will need to target conserved HIV-1 genome sequences. The question then arises, how to best target these conserved HIV-1 sequences? Several approaches are under consideration currently. At the forefront are various DNA Prime/Boost vaccine approaches involving the use of a DNA Prime followed by a recombinant microbial vector boost, e.g., MVA or Adenovirus. Notably are the delayed PAVE 100 DNA Prime/Adenovirus Boost (1;60) and DNA Prime/MVA boost (2;60). Another approach uses a DNA Prime followed by a recombinant protein boost as per ( 3 ; 59) These only being a sampling of the HIV-1 vaccines under serious development. (9;86) Given this emphasis on DNA Vaccines, which offers ease of production and low cost logistical advantages, it seems merited to consider carefully the fact that no DNA vaccine has shown efficacy in humans despite many years of research. One possible reason for the failed efficacy of DNA Vaccines in humans may be that cellular RNAi mechanisms, as spoken to in abstracts and citations below (4-8), may target the mRNA of a DNA Vaccine thereby curtailing or preventing translation into vaccine epitopes/antigens. On this in email exchanges: HIV-1 Vaccine Summit Co-chair Warner C. Greene, M.D., Ph.D. Director, Gladstone Institute of Virology and Immunology replied: "Micro RNAs, in contrast to synthetic siRNAs, block the translation of mRNAs into their protein products instead of inducing mRNA degradation. However, for a vaccine which depends on the production of the antigen, their net effect is similar. I do not know whether any of the naturally occurring micro RNAs would be predicted to inhibit production of the protein products from the current spectrum of DNA vaccines that are being tested. It has been clear for some time that DNA-based vaccines work significantly less well in humans than in mice. I suspect the reason for this is multifactorial and not solely due to micro RNAs." Bharat Ramratnam, an RNAi researcher at Brown U, said: "It would entirely depend upon the nucelic acid sequence of the immunogen--if it were homologous to a miRNA, then a nil to modest to severe reduction in immunogen transcript level could be expected. We have been looking at this, but NO conclusive data Stay tuned...." Monsef Benkirane, an RNAi researcher and associate editor of the Journal Retrovirology, said: "Absolutely, DNA viruses often produce viral miRNA that will either target viral mRNA or cellular miRNA. I believe that one should try to avoid any mRNA structure that will serve as substrate for Drosha and Dicer in the process of making DNA viruses vaccine." A successful HIV-1 DNA Vaccine will need to target conserved sequences of HIV-1(10), the very same sequences of mRNA that cellular RNAi will need to target to curtail HIV-1 replication. Therefore it stands to reason that cellular RNAi will also target these HIV-1 DNA Vaccine mRNA sequences for silencing/RNAi thereby curtailing DNA Vaccine Efficacy. In my humble opinion this is probably the case, and along with other factors, are the reason DNA vaccines have failed to show efficacy in humans despite many attempts over a number of years. Speaking to other factors as to why DNA Vaccines don't show the efficacy they did in proof of concept small animal trials. In an email exchange Robert Malone, an early DNA plasmid gene therapy pioneer, said: "Basically, the transfection efficiency in larger mammals is not good. If the original hypothesis of my colleague Dennis Carson held (muscle cells as APC), then due to absence of costimulatory molecules on muscle cells the "vaccination" would have evoked tolerance, not immunity! To the extent that delivery to and expression in muscle is important, it appears to be due to cross-priming (exosomes?). Rather, tissue dendritic cells are most likely the important actors." "I was well aware of the fact that the field "ran off" to prove the utility in humans of what was really immature technology. The rodent findings were merely proof of the concept, but the delivery technology was not "enabling" for larger mammals." Muscle mass in humans is much greater than in small animals therefore much of a DNA Vaccine is taken up by muscle cells rather than DCs, as Dr Robert Malone says above, this would reduce DNA Vaccine efficacy. Further, according to my understanding, any DNA Vaccine translated peptide and/or protein mRNA transcript would be processed and presented as antigen via the endogenous rather than the exogenous/cross-priming HLA I pathway. The DNA Vaccine construct mRNA transcripts would be treated as mRNA of a virus which infected the cell. This could result in the killing of some cells by immune system components, Th1 CTL and Th2 Antibody both I think. All this doesn't even speak to safety concerns which may result in a delay in the FDA regulatory approval process for any DNA Vaccine, not covered here for brevity. These DNA Vaccine Efficacy and/or Safety problems bring into question the utility of continued investment of time, effort and money, both public and private, into a number of HIV-1 DNA Vaccines in clinical trials, spoken to in an article by Margaret Johnston, head of HIV-1 Vaccines at DAIDS at NIAID, and Anthony Fauci, head of NIAID . ( 9) The use of recombinant viral vectors also presents us with several problems. Pre-existing immunity, as shown in the recent failed Mrk Ad5 vaccine trials (11;60), is one problem. Anti-vector immune responses would curtail, even where there is no preexisting immunity, efficacy. These anti-vector immune responses would also squander immune system components ---cellular and soluble cytokines such as IL-2 as well as molecular building blocks, e.g., amino acids, peptides and proteins ---needed for protective immunity. This being of particular importance in populations under general immunosuppression, as per the case with the HIV+ and/or HIV- malnourished populations found mainly in the poor nations, with limited immunologic potential. Further, these populations are under a high state of immune activation. (20;65;91;93) Besides endemic gut parasite and other infections, a high state of immune activation occurs due to multiple insults--- generally squalid living conditions, unsanitary food, un-potable water, biting insects and environmental pollution. This highlights the need to use a innocuous vaccine vector that avoids undue systemic immune activation in order to prevent further vaccine induced immunosuppressive cytokines such as IL-10 and Tregs which would reduce vaccine efficacy. (65;92;94-101) Similar would apply if a systemic adjuvant, as QS-21 adjuvant (Antigenics Inc., Woburn,MA) (59) was used as part of the vaccine. Should we be designing vaccines that use microbial vectors, adjuvants or excess HIV-1 epitopes/antigens that may induce unneeded immune activation, which may be counterproductive as regards vaccine efficacy by causing the activation of T Cells unnecessarily? One consequence of an HIV-1Vaccine that causes undo immune activation would be, activated T cells are more readily infected by HIV. Another consequence may be the induction of HIV-1 replication by latently infected T cells and/or a higher rate of replication by HIV-1 infected T cells already replicating HIV-1 at lower levels. Taken together, an HIV-1 vaccine that induces inappropriate activation of T cells may lead to the higher HIV-1 viral loads characteristic of AIDS disease progression, while on the other hand it is acting to curtail HIV-1 viral loads, in total, reduced vaccine efficacy. I think we must choose HIV-1 Vaccine components carefully to insure as best we can that only cells important to HIV-1 protective immune responses are activated. This would reduce any possible vaccine induced contribution to AIDS immune hyper activation pathologies. Safety issues disfavor viral vaccie vectors. They have been shown to cause death, Jesse Gelsinger's death caused by an adenovirus vector in gene therapy trial (12) and disease in some cases, as per OPV actually causing vaccine induced polio (13;60), MVA causing heart problems(14) and worsened RSV disease in children upon re-exposure after inactivated RSV vaccination (60). Of coursethere is also a chance of reversion to virulence upon serial passage from one person to another over time (15). Another approach which has fallen out of favor since Dr Donald Francis/Vaxgen's AIDSVAX, which used only gp120 epitopes from a narrow range of HIV-1type B strains, failed to show efficacy (16), is the use of Recombinant Peptides in an HIV-1 vaccine. By expanding the peptide epitopes to be used in a vaccine tocover multiple conserved consensus HIV-1 sequences from various HIV-1 strains worldwide, this approach deserves further consideration I think.(10) A HepB Peptide vaccine that has shown efficacy and safety is currently being used in humans. (17) This should speed FDA approval of a HIV-1 Peptide Vaccine. The general concept of a polyvalent peptide prime followed by a pseudoprotein boost is a viable approach according to my understanding of the literature over the past 23 years. Recent human Phase I Trials by Dr Shan Lu, UMASS Medical School, and colleagues, using a polyvalent DNA prime followed by pseudoprotein boost regimen have shown promise.(3 ; 59) The DNA Prime epitopes used were from a narrow range of older HIV-1 isolates: "five plasmids each encoding a codon-optimized gp120 gene sequence from the following primary HIV-1 envelope proteins: subtypes A (92UG037.8), B (92US715.6 and Bal), C (96ZM651) and E (93TH976.17) and the sixth plasmid encoding a codon-optimized gag gene from subtype C (96ZM651) as previously described [28]." As regards the pseudoprotein boosters used: "The recombinant Env protein vaccine components included in the DP6-001 formulation contain equal amounts of five gp120 proteins matching that used in DNA prime components and were produced in CHO cell lines by Advanced BioScience Laboratories (ABL, Kensington, MD) using GMP compliance as previously described [28]. The final protein vaccine product was supplied in saline and re-formulated at the time of injec- tion with 50_g of QS-21 adjuvant (Antigenics Inc., Woburn, MA) and 30 mg of excipient cyclodextrin (Cargill Cerestar USA Inc., Hammond, IN)," I think a better approach is to use Conserved Immunogenic Consensus Sequences (ICS) defined by close computer analysis of multiple HIV clades/strains worldwide, bioinformatics, to point the vaccine induced immune response to conserved epitopes most likely to offer protection for all strains of HIV-1 worldwide.(10) The GAIA HIV-1 Vaccine abstract (10) points out a number of excellent HIV-1 Conserved Immunogenic Consensus Sequences (ICS) derived from close computer aided analysis, bioinformatics, of multiple HIV-1 genome sequences, covering various HIV-1 strains worldwide, which can be used as HIV-1Epitopes/Antigens in order to conduct comparative studies between DNA and Peptide/ Pseudoprotein formulations of a HIV-1 Vaccine, using the same ICS epitopes, to determine which approach is best. GAIA is a not for profit foundation (http://www.gaiavaccine.org/matriarch/default.asp) dedicated to the development of a HIV-1 Vaccine available to rich and poor alike. HIV-1's main portals of entry are at various mucosal surfaces and the site of most CD 4+ T Cell Loss early on. (21-29) It makes good vaccine sense to target a vaccine to the GALT which can result in good immunity at various mucosas as well as systemically. (30-34;48-49;85;89) This should curtail or prevent infection and/or systemic dissemination of HIV-1. A Gelcap encapsulated (35-37;89)Mannosylated (38-41 ) Self-adjuvanting (42-47 )Freeze-dried Liposome Vector (36) which targets the GAIA HIV-1 Vaccine components to the mannose receptor on DCs (40;50-52), and DEC-205 on DCs and B cells (61),can orally deliver both DNA and/or Peptide/Pseudoprotein formulations of a HIV-1 Vaccine to DCs and B Cells of the GALT. I suggest we conduct two prong comparative trials using a GAIA HIV-1 ICS Vaccine Polyvalent Peptide Prime, DNA ICS Prime in one prong and Plain ICS Peptide Prime in the other prong, and GAIA Recombinant ICS Pseudoprotein Boost in both prongs to determine which strategy is best. The presence of DEC-205 on B Cells and DCs is good news. Mannosylated Liposomes uptake should allow B Cells (53-55 ) and DCs to be used as APC(55;61). Mannan-binding lectin (40) should bind the Mannosylated Liposomes vector, activating the classical complement cascade(62) and inducing opsonization/phagocytosis and antigen presentation . Mannosylated Liposome will also provide lipids which are key to proper trafficking and loading of ICS epitopes onto HLA I & II. (31;43;63) "Presence of both liposomal lipids and liposomal protein in the trans-Golgi therefore facilitates the entry of liposomal antigens into the MHC class I pathway. It is also possible that liposomal lipids are presented to T cells via the recently described CD1 pathway for lipid antigens. Because liposome-formulated vaccines have the potential to stimulate antibody as well as cellular immune responses to protein and lipid components, this approach could prove to be extremely useful in designing vaccine strategies."(63) The use of the CD1 antigen pathway is not spoken to here, however I think it possible that both MHC I & II and CD1 may be used with this vector strategy. If so, this would greatly enhance the GAIA HIV-1 ICS Vaccine induced immune responses. This delivery of concentrated high dose multiple consensus antigens to GALT DCs and B cells is crucial in order to evoke mucosal and systemic immune responses which are very strong in breadth and depth. This is essential given thesmall number of infectious HIV-1 vs Non-infectious HIV-1(NHIV-1), 1 in 10,000+ HIV-1 progeny(64;66;68 ), essential to protective immunity. We have a small target of HIV-1 in a large crowd of NHIV-1, therefore we will need this very strong immune response to insure efficacy. Without infectious HIV-1 capable of producing both HIV-1 and NHIV-1 there will be no more AIDS. Both DCs and B Cells have TLR-2 which can bind Mannosylated Liposome activating DCs and B Cells via the Toll Pathway, adjuvanting actions akin to LPS/Freud's adjuvant. Causing up-regulation of co-stimulatory molecules, MHC II and cytokine secretion (55-58;73-82;84) and endocytosis of the GAIA ICS Liposome Vaccine Vector: "Thus, antigen linked to the TLR2 ligand can be endocytosed after binding TLR2, processed via the classical (exogenous) pathway of antigen presentation, and can enhance the stimulation of T cells. This same route could be exploited to generate more efficacious vaccines." (70) (71;75) Multiple pathways of DC and B Cell phagocytosis/uptake of Mannosylated Liposome encapsulated GAIA ICS antigens should give a stronger vaccine induced immune response by providing a reciprocal boosting of the DC and B Cell vaccine induced immune response. (72) Best would be an oral formulation with no boost required. This would offer ease of administration, along with several cost and safety advantages when you consider the need to vaccinate several billion people living mainly in the resource poor nations with limited healthcare infrastructures and public transport. This is highlighted by recent reports regarding the reuse of dirty syringes and medical equipment occurring in the world's richest nation, the USA. (18) In the resource poor nations this is even more likely to occur owing to cost considerations as well as lack of education regarding proper medical hygiene and generally meager healthcare infrastructures, as per the case of HCV transmission by reusing unsterile syringes in Egypt. (19) To test this one dose oral vaccination (88-90) possibility I suggest we try, in addition to the proposed two prong GAIA ICS Prime and Pseudoprotein Boost above, the administration of peptide and protein components of the vaccine simultaneously also. This would mimic reasonably well what happens in natural exposure to HIV-1, where in the majority of exposures no actual transmission/infection occurs. Further there is the concern regarding Tregs commonly found in HIV-1/Aids as indicated by the excellent research of Gene Shearer NCI and colleagues. (67;69) which could curtail vaccine induced antigen specific CD 4+ T Helper cells which are crucial to the establishment of long term immunologic memory. The large number of CD 4+ T Helper cells induced by this GAIA HIV-1 ICS Vaccine strategy should be able to withstand any ensuing Tregs which tend to come into play later. (83) Thereby providing a excellent pool of Memory CD 4+ T Helper (87) able to rapidly respond to future encounters with HIV-1, be it from further exposures or bouts of HIV-1 replication in vivo in the chronically HIV-1 +. In effect, it is hoped that this HIV-1 vaccine strategy will be Therapeutic and Preventative/Prophylactic! Thanking you in advance for considering this proposed HIV-1 Vaccine development strategy. Jesse Creel Vaccine Research Advocate 1104 River Valley Dr #3 Flint, MI 48532 Email: JesseCreel@comcast.net A special thanks to Dr Anne De Groot and colleagues at GAIA Vaccine Foundation, Dr Gene Shearer at the NCI and Dr Robert Malone for the many helpful insights and encouragement provided without which I could not have ever proceeded. Please see Endnote Regarding Production of GAIA ICS Antigen ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ References 1. PAVE 100 http://www.hivpave.org/about/pave100-copy.html 2. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007 Dec;82(6):686-93 3. Springer Semin Immunopathol. 2006 Nov;28(3):255-65 4. Journal of Virology, March 2008, p. 2895-2903, Vol. 82, No. 6 Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Escape Is Restricted When Conserved Genome Sequences Are Targeted by RNA Interference Karin Jasmijn von Eije, Olivier ter Brake, and Ben Berkhout* Laboratory of Experimental Virology, Department of Medical Microbiology, Center for Infection and Immunity Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center of the University of Amsterdam, K3-110, Meibergdreef 15, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands Received 14 September 2007/ Accepted 5 December 2007 RNA interference (RNAi) is a cellular mechanism in which small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) mediate sequence-specific gene silencing by cleaving the targeted mRNA. RNAi can be used as an antiviral approach to silence the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) through stable expression of short-hairpin RNAs (shRNAs). We previously reported efficient HIV-1 inhibition by an shRNA against the nonessential nef gene but also described viral escape by mutation or deletion of the nef target sequence. The objective of this study was to obtain insight in the viral escape routes when essential and highly conserved sequences are targeted in the Gag, protease, integrase, and Tat-Rev regions of HIV-1. Target sequences were analyzed of more than 500 escape viruses that were selected in T cells expressing individual shRNAs. Viruses acquired single point mutations, occasionally secondary mutations, but-in contrast to what is observed with nef-no deletions were detected. Mutations occurred predominantly at target positions 6, 8, 9, 14, and 15, whereas none were selected at positions 1, 2, 5, 18, and 19. We also analyzed the type of mismatch in the siRNA-target RNA duplex, and G-U base pairs were frequently selected. These results provide insight into the sequence requirements for optimal RNAi inhibition. This knowledge on RNAi escape may guide the design and selection of shRNAs for the development of an effective RNAi therapy for HIV-1 infections. * Corresponding author. Mailing address: Laboratory of Experimental Virology, Department of Medical Microbiology, Center for Infection and Immunity Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center of the University of Amsterdam, K3-110, Meibergdreef 15, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Phone: 31 20 566 4822. Fax: 31 20 691 6531. E-mail: b.berkhout@amc.uva.nl Published ahead of print on 12 December 2007. http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/82/6/2895?etoc 5. Journal of Virology, March 2008, p. 2938-2951, Vol. 82, No. 6 Targets of Small Interfering RNA Restriction during Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Replication Yong Gao,1 Michael A. Lobritz,1,2 Justin Roth,3 Measho Abreha,1 Kenneth N. Nelson,1 Immaculate Nankya,1,2 Dawn M. Moore-Dudley,1,2 Awet Abraha,1 Stanton L. Gerson,3 and Eric J. Arts1,2* Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine,1 Department of Molecular Biology and Microbiology,2 Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, Ohio 441063 Received 26 September 2007/ Accepted 4 January 2008 Small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) have been shown to effectively inhibit human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) replication in vitro. The mechanism(s) for this inhibition is poorly understood, as siRNAs may interact with multiple HIV-1 RNA species during different steps of the retroviral life cycle. To define susceptible HIV-1 RNA species, siRNAs were first designed to specifically inhibit two divergent primary HIV-1 isolates via env and gag gene targets. A self-inactivating lentiviral vector harboring these target sequences confirmed that siRNA cannot degrade incoming genomic RNA. Disruption of the incoming core structure by rhesus macaque TRIM5 did, however, provide siRNA-RNA-induced silencing complex access to HIV-1 genomic RNA and promoted degradation. In the absence of accelerated core disruption, only newly transcribed HIV-1 mRNA in the cytoplasm is sensitive to siRNA degradation. Inhibitors of HIV-1 mRNA nuclear export, such as leptomycin B and camptothecin, blocked siRNA restriction. All HIV-1 RNA regions and transcripts found 5' of the target sequence, including multiply spliced HIV-1 RNA, were degraded by unidirectional 3'-to-5' siRNA amplification and spreading. In contrast, HIV-1 RNA 3' of the target sequence was not susceptible to siRNA. Even in the presence of siRNA, full-length HIV-1 RNA is still encapsidated into newly assembled viruses. These findings suggest that siRNA can target only a relatively "naked" cytoplasmic HIV-1 RNA despite the involvement of viral RNA at nearly every step in the retroviral life cycle. Protection of HIV-1 RNA within the core following virus entry, during encapsidation/virus assembly, or within the nucleus may reflect virus evolution in response to siRNA, TRIM5, or other host restriction factors. * Corresponding author. Mailing address: Division of Infectious Diseases, BRB 1034, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, OH 44106. Phone: (216) 368-8904. Fax: (216) 368-2034. E-mail: eja3@case.edu Published ahead of print on 16 January 2008. http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/82/6/2938?etoc 6. Nature Medicine 13, 1241 - 1247 (2007) 7. Retrovirology 2005, 2:81doi:10.1186/1742-4690-2-81 8. Nucleic Acids Research, 2007,Vol.35, No. 10 e73 9. N Engl J Med 2007;356:2073-81. 10. Vaccine 23 (2005) 2136-2148 HIV vaccine development by computer assisted design: the GAIA vaccine Anne S. De Groot a,b,?, Luisa Marconc, Elizabeth A. Bishop a, Daniel Rivera a, Michele Kutzler d, David B. Weiner d, William Martin b a TB/HIV Research Laboratory, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, USA b EpiVax Inc., Providence, RI 02903, USA c University of Padva Medical School, USA d University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA Abstract The design of epitope-driven vaccines that address the global variability of HIV has been significantly hampered by concerns about conservation of the vaccine epitopes across clades of HIV. We developed two computer-driven methods for improving epitope-driven HIV vaccines: the Epi-Assembler, which derives representative or "immunogenic consensus sequence" (ICS) epitopes from multiple viral variants, and VaccineCAD, which reduces junctional immunogenicity when epitopes are aligned in a string-of-beads format for insertion in a DNA expression vector. In this study, we report on 20 ICS HIV-1 peptides. The core 9-mer contained in these consensus peptides was conserved in 105-2250 individual HIV-1 strains. Nineteen of the 20 ICS epitopes (95%) evaluated in this study were confirmed in ELISpot assays using peripheral blood monocytes obtained from 13 healthy HIV-1 infected subjects. Twenty-five ICS peptides (all 20 of the peptides evaluated in this study and 5 additional ICS epitopes) were then aligned in a pseudoprotein string using "VaccineCAD", an epitope alignment tool that eliminates immunogenicity created by the junctions between the epitopes. Reordering the construct reduced the immunogenicity of the junctions between epitopes as measured by EpiMatrix, an epitope mapping algorithm. The reordered construct was also a more effective immunogen in vivo when tested in HLA-DR transgenic mice. These data confirm the utility of bioinformatics tools to design novel vaccines containing "immunogenic consensus sequence" Tcell epitopes for a globally relevant vaccine against HIV. Keywords: Epitope; Immunoinformatics; T cell; Major histocompatibility complex ? Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 401 863 6083; fax: +1 401 863 6087. E-mail addresses: annied@epivax.com, annied@brown.edu, anne degroot@brown.edu (A.S. De Groot). 11. Aids Vaccine Advocacy Coalition Mrk Ad5 HIV-1 Vaccine Trial Failure http://www.avac.org/ANRS_mtng_summary.htm 12. Nature Medicine 6, 6 (2000) doi:10.1038/71545 13. OPV As Cause of Polio http://www.polioeradication.org/vaccines.asp 14. MVA and Heart Problems http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/smallpox/vaccination/cardiacrecentvaccinees.asp 15. Serial Human Passage of Simian Immunodeficiency Virus by Unsterile Injections and the Emergence of Epidemic Human Immunodeficiency Virus in Africa Preston A. Marx, Phillip G. Alcabes, Ernest Drucker Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, Vol. 356, No. 1410, Origins of HIV and the AIDS Epidemic (Jun. 29, 2001), pp. 911-920 16. Vaccine has no impact AIDSVAX's failure a blow to treatment David R. Baker, SF Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, November 13, 2003 17. ENGERIX-B? [Hepatitis B Vaccine (Recombinant)] DESCRIPTION ENGERIX-B [Hepatitis B Vaccine (Recombinant)] is a noninfectious recombinant peptide vaccine http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_engerixb.pdf 18. CDC Head: Problems at Nevada Clinic Could Be 'Tip of Iceberg'" Associated Press , (03.04.2008) 19. Dirty needles lead to hepatitis C outbreak - Medical News From Around The World - Brief Article Nutrition Health Review, Fall, 2002 EGYPT -- Up to 20 percent of people living in Egypt have tested positive for hepatitis C, a disease that can cause liver failure, and dirty needles are thought to be the reason, according to an article in The Lancet (March 11, 2000). http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0876/is_2002_Fall/ai_95147890 20. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2001 Dec 15;28(5):429-36. Evaluation of immune activation in HIV-infected and uninfected African individuals by single-cell analysis of cytokine production. 21. Retrovirology. 2007 Dec 4;4:87. Compartmentalization of the gut viral reservoir in HIV-1 infected patients. 22. J Immunol. 2007 Sep 1;179(5):3035-46. Acute loss of intestinal CD4+ T cells is not predictive of simian immunodeficiency virus virulence. 23. J Virol. 2007 Jan;81(2):599-612. Mechanisms of gastrointestinal CD4+ T-cell depletion during acute and early human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection. 24. J Virol. 2003 Nov;77(21):11708-17. Severe CD4+ T-cell depletion in gut lymphoid tissue during primary human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection and substantial delay in restoration following highly active antiretroviral therapy. 25. J Virol. 2003 Nov;77(21):11708-17. Antiviral Therapy During Primary SIV Infection Fails to Prevent Acute CD4+ T-cell Loss In Gut Mucosa But Enhances Their Rapid Restoration Through Central Memory T-cells 26. J Infect Dis. 2008 Feb 8 Persistence of HIV in Gut-Associated Lymphoid Tissue despite Long-Term Antiretroviral Therapy. 27. J Clin Microbiol. 2008 Feb;46(2):757-8. Early impairment of gut function and gut flora supporting a role for alteration of gastrointestinal mucosa in human immunodeficiency virus pathogenesis. 28. the prn notebook? |volume 12 | www.prn.org The Gastrointestinal Tract in HIV-1 Infection: Questions, Answers, and More Questions! Saurabh Mehandru, MD 29. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, February 2008, p. 757-758, Vol. 46, No. 2 Early Impairment of Gut Function and Gut Flora Supporting a Role for Alteration of Gastrointestinal Mucosa in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Pathogenesis 30. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2007 Apr;6(2):203-12. Clarification of how HIV-1 DNA and protein immunizations may be better used to obtain HIV-1-specific mucosal and systemic immunity 31. Eur J Immunol. 2002 Aug;32(8):2274-81. Systemic immune responses induced by mucosal administration of lipopeptides without adjuvant 32. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Feb 17;95(4):1709-14. Mucosal immunization with HIV-1 peptide vaccine induces mucosal and systemic cytotoxic T lymphocytes and protective immunity in mice against intrarectal recombinant HIV-vaccinia challenge. 33. J Virol. 2004 Jan;78(2):1020-5. Mucosal and systemic immune responses to a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 epitope induced upon vaginal infection with a recombinant influenza A virus. 34. Nature Medicine 11, S45 - S53 (2005) Mucosal immunity and vaccines 35. United States Patent 6726924 Oral liposomal delivery system US Patent Issued on April 27, 2004 http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6726924-description.html 36. NanoSorb Gelcaps Please note towards the end of this slide presentation Nanocaps, dedydrated liposomes encapsulated in gel caps to protect from degradation in the stomach and delivery to the gut lumen for release, rehydration and uptake by DC of GALT http://www.biopharmasci.com/downloads/nanosorb.ppt 37. BioZone Laboratories Inc Drug Delivery Platforms Available HyperSorbT - Oral delivery in gel caps of liposomes for improved bioavailability http://www.biozonelabs.com/html/TechnologyLicensing.htm 38. J Control Release. 2005 Nov 28;108(2-3):484-95. Epub 2005 Sep 19. The role of dioleoylphosphatidylethanolamine (DOPE) in targeted gene delivery with mannosylated cationic liposomes via intravenous route. 39. Gene Ther. 2000 Feb;7(4):292-9. Mannose receptor-mediated gene transfer into macrophages using novel mannosylated cationic liposomes. 40. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2001 Mar 9;1511(1):134-45. Involvement of serum mannan binding proteins and mannose receptors in uptake of mannosylated liposomes by macrophages. 41. J Control Release. 2008 Jan 22;125(2):121-30. Epub 2007 Oct 22. Efficient targeting to alveolar macrophages by intratracheal administration of mannosylated liposomes in rats. 42. J Immunol. 2001 Feb 1;166(3):1885-93. The potent adjuvant activity of archaeosomes correlates to the recruitment and activation of macrophages and dendritic cells in vivo. 43. Vaccine. 2001 May 14;19(25-26):3509-17. Immunization of mice with lipopeptide antigens encapsulated in novel liposomes prepared from the polar lipids of various Archaeobacteria elicits rapid and prolonged specific protective immunity against infection with the facultative intracellular pathogen, Listeria monocytogenes. 44. Curr Drug Deliv. 2005 Oct;2(4):407-21. Archaeosome immunostimulatory vaccine delivery system. Patel GB, Chen W. 45. Infect Immun. 2000 Jan;68(1):54-63. Links Archaeosome vaccine adjuvants induce strong humoral, cell-mediated, and memory responses: comparison to conventional liposomes and alum. 46. J Drug Target. 2003;11(8-10):515-24. Archaeosomes as self-adjuvanting delivery systems for cancer vaccines. 47. Vaccine. 2007 Dec 12;25(51):8622-36. Epub 2007 Oct 5. Mucosal and systemic immune responses by intranasal immunization using archaeal lipid-adjuvanted vaccines. 48. Yakugaku Zasshi. 2007 Feb;127(2):319-26. [Uniqueness of the mucosal immune system for the development of prospective mucosal vaccine 49. Med Sci (Paris). 2007 Apr;23(4):371-8. [Mucosal immunity and vaccine development] [Article in French] 50. Annu Rev Immunol. 2007;25:381-418. Mucosal dendritic cells. 51. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2008 4. Gastrointestinal mucosal immunity 52. Biologicals. 2001 Sep-Dec;29(3-4):183-8. Chemoselective ligation and antigen vectorization. 53. J Immunol. 2007 Mar 1;178(5):2803-12. Staphylococcus aureus protein A triggers T cell-independent B cell proliferation by sensitizing B cells for TLR2 ligands 54. Eur J Immunol. 1994 Oct;24(10):2506-14. Role of antigen-presenting cells in the polarized development of helper T cell subsets: evidence for differential cytokine production by Th0 cells in response to antigen presentation by B cells and macrophages 55. Eur J Immunol. 2007 Nov;37(11):3040-53. TLR-mediated stimulation of APC: Distinct cytokine responses of B cells and dendritic cells. 56. J Exp Med. 2008 Jan 21;205(1):169-81. Epub 2008 Jan 7. Mannose-binding lectin enhances Toll-like receptors 2 and 6 signaling from the phagosome. 57. Nature. 1999 Oct 21;401(6755):811-5. Comment in: Nature. 1999 Oct 21;401(6755):755-6. The Toll-like receptor 2 is recruited to macrophage phagosomes and discriminates between pathogens 58. . Immunobiology Part I. An Introduction to Immunobiology and Innate Immunity 2. Innate Immunity--Receptors of the innate immune system. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?highlight=toll,pathway&rid=imm.section.193#198 59. Vaccine. 2008 Feb 20;26(8):1098-110. Epub 2008 Jan 10. Cross-subtype antibody and cellular immune responses induced by a polyvalent DNA prime-protein boost HIV-1 vaccine in healthy human volunteers. 60. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2008 Mar;7(2):151-3. Human versus HIV: round 2 defeat in AIDS vaccine development. Lu S. PMID: 18324884 61. Int Immunol. 2006 Jun;18(6):857-69. Epub 2006 Mar 31. Expression of human DEC-205 (CD205) multilectin receptor on leukocytes. 62. Immunobiology Part I. An Introduction to Immunobiology and Innate Immunity 2. Innate Immunity The complement system and innate immunity. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?highlight=mannan%20binding%20lectin&rid=imm.section.161#170 63. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2000 Mar 30;41(2):171-88. Delivery of lipids and liposomal proteins to the cytoplasm and Golgi of antigen-presenting cells. mangala.rao@na.amedd.army.mil. Rao M, Alving CR. Department of Membrane Biochemistry, Bldg. 40, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Washington, DC 20307-5100, USA. Liposomes have the well-known ability to channel protein and peptide antigens into the MHC class II pathway of phagocytic antigen-presenting cells (APCs) and thereby enhance the induction of antibodies and antigen-specific T cell proliferative responses. Liposomes also serve as an efficient delivery system for entry of exogenous protein and peptide antigens into the MHC class I pathway and thus are very efficient inducers of cytotoxic T cell responses. Soluble antigens that are rendered particulate by encapsulation in liposomes are localized both in vacuoles and in the cytoplasm of bone marrow-derived macrophages. Utilizing fluorophore-labeled proteins encapsulated in liposomes we have addressed the question of how liposomal antigens enter the MHC class I pathway. After phagocytosis of the liposomes, the fluorescent liposomal protein and liposomal lipids enter the cytoplasm where they are processed by the proteasome complex. The processed liposomal protein is then transported via the TAP complex into the endoplasmic reticulum and the Golgi complex. Both the liposomal lipids and the liposomal proteins appear to follow the same intracellular route and they are processed as a protein-lipid unit. In the absence of a protein antigen (empty liposomes), there is no organelle-specific localization of the liposomal lipids. In contrast, when a protein is encapsulated in these liposomes, the distribution of the liposomal lipids is dramatically affected and the liposomal lipids localize to the trans-Golgi area. Localization of the protein in the trans-Golgi area requires liposomal lipids. Similarly, for the localization of liposomal lipids in the trans-Golgi area, there is an obligatory requirement for protein. Therefore, the intracellular trafficking patterns of liposomal lipids and liposomal protein are reciprocally regulated. Presence of both liposomal lipids and liposomal protein in the trans-Golgi therefore facilitates the entry of liposomal antigens into the MHC class I pathway. It is also possible that liposomal lipids are presented to T cells via the recently described CD1 pathway for lipid antigens. Because liposome-formulated vaccines have the potential to stimulate antibody as well as cellular immune responses to protein and lipid components, this approach could prove to be extremely useful in designing vaccine strategies. PMID: 10699313 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Related Links a.. Trafficking of liposomal antigen to the trans-Golgi of murine macrophages requires both liposomal lipid and liposomal protein. [Exp Cell Res. 1999] b.. Visualization of peptides derived from liposome-encapsulated proteins in the trans-Golgi area of macrophages. [Immunol Lett. 1997] c.. Liposomes containing lipid A serve as an adjuvant for induction of antibody and cytotoxic T-cell responses against RTS,S malaria antigen. [Infect Immun. 1998] d.. Human dendritic cells and macrophages exhibit different intracellular processing pathways for soluble and liposome-encapsulated antigens. [Immunobiology. 2005] e.. Cytotoxic T lymphocytes induced by liposomal antigens: mechanisms of immunological presentation. [AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 1994] All Related Articles Link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&DbFrom=pubmed&Cmd=Link&LinkName=pubmed_pubmed&LinkReadableName=Related%20Articles&IdsFromResult=10699313&ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA 64. Program Abstr Conf Retrovir Oppor Infect 11th 2004 San Franc Calif. 2004 Feb 8-11; 11: abstract no. 450. CD4+ T-cell Depletion in AIDS: Synergy between Non-infectious HIV-1 and Other Viruses Induces Selective Apoptosis via a TRAIL/TRAIL Receptor-dependent Mechanism 65. Clin Immunol. 2008 Mar;126(3):235-42. Epub 2007 Oct 3. Chronic innate immune activation as a cause of HIV-1 immunopathogenesis. 66. Clin Immunol. 2007 May;123(2):121-8. Epub 2006 Nov 16. HIV-1 immunopathogenesis: how good interferon turns bad. 67. Blood. 2006 Dec 1;108(12):3808-17. Epub 2006 Aug 10. HIV-1-driven regulatory T-cell accumulation in lymphoid tissues is associated with disease progression in HIV/AIDS. 68. Blood. 2005 Nov 15;106(10):3524-31. Epub 2005 Jul 26. CD4+ T-cell death induced by infectious and noninfectious HIV-1: role of type 1 interferon-dependent, TRAIL/DR5-mediated apoptosis. 69. J Immunol. 2005 Mar 15;174(6):3143-7. The prevalence of regulatory T cells in lymphoid tissue is correlated with viral load in HIV-infected patients. 70. Eurekah Bioscience Collection Signal Transduction The Function of Toll-Like Receptors--TLR Ligand Linked Antigen Presentation in Immature DCs Human immature DCs derived from bone marrow, pulsed with antagonistic TLR2 specific mAbs containing ? light chains, could stimulate a C? specific CD4+ T cell clone in the absence of maturation effects on iDCs (Fig. 7C). An isotype/light-chain matched control antibody produced a two to three orders of magnitude lower response, indicating enhanced antigen presentation via TLR2. Stimulation was TLR2 specific, as antibodies against other surface molecules such as CD62 and CXCR1 were not stimulatory. Inhibitors of lysosomal degradation, processing and MHC class II presentation like chloroquine, leupeptin or brefeldin A almost completely abolished T cell stimulation. Furthermore, an anti-TLR2 mAb was directly shown to reside in endosomal vesicles in pulsed iDCs. 31 Thus, antigen linked to the TLR2 ligand can be endocytosed after binding TLR2, processed via the classical (exogenous) pathway of antigen presentation, and can enhance the stimulation of T cells. This same route could be exploited to generate more efficacious vaccines. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?highlight=tlr,maturation,antibody&rid=eurekah.section.26308 71.J Biol Chem. 2007 Jul 20;282(29):21145-59. Epub 2007 Apr 26. Distinct uptake mechanisms but similar intracellular processing of two different toll-like receptor ligand-peptide conjugates in dendritic cells. 72. Blood. 2006 Jul 15;108(2):544-50. Epub 2006 Mar 14. Synergistic activation of dendritic cells by combined Toll-like receptor ligation induces superior CTL responses in vivo. 73. J Immunol. 2004 Apr 15;172(8):4733-43. A Toll-like receptor 2 ligand stimulates Th2 responses in vivo, via induction of extracellular signal-regulated kinase mitogen-activated protein kinase and c-Fos in dendritic cells. 74. J Virol. 2003 Oct;77(19):10250-9. Yeast-derived human immunodeficiency virus type 1 p55(gag) virus-like particles activate dendritic cells (DCs) and induce perforin expression in Gag-specific CD8(+) T cells by cross-presentation of DCs. 75. J Immunol. 2003 Jul 1;171(1):32-6. Cutting edge: link between innate and adaptive immunity: Toll-like receptor 2 internalizes antigen for presentation to CD4+ T cells and could be an efficient vaccine target.Schjetne KW, Thompson KM, Nilsen N, Flo TH, Fleckenstein B, Iversen JG, Espevik T, Bogen B. Institute of Immunology, University of Oslo, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway. k.w.schjetne@labmed.uio.no An ideal vaccine for induction of CD4(+) T cell responses should induce local inflammation, maturation of APC, and peptide loading of MHC class II molecules. Ligation of Toll-like receptor (TLR) 2 provides the first two of these three criteria. We have studied whether targeting of TLR2 results in loading of MHC class II molecules and enhancement of CD4(+) T cell responses. To dissociate MHC class II presentation from APC maturation, we have used an antagonistic, mouse anti-human TLR2 mAb (TL2.1) as ligand and measured proliferation of a mouse Ckappa-specific human CD4(+) T cell clone. TL2.1 mAb was 100-1000 times more efficiently presented by APC compared with isotype-matched control mAb. Moreover, TL2.1 mAb was internalized into endosomes and processed by the conventional MHC class II pathway. This novel function of TLR2 represents a link between innate and adaptive immunity and indicates that TLR2 could be a promising target for vaccines 76. J Immunol. 2004 Sep 15;173(6):3916-24. Microglia initiate central nervous system innate and adaptive immune responses through multiple TLRs 77. Nippon Ishinkin Gakkai Zasshi. 2002;43(3):133-6. Receptor-mediated recognition of Cryptococcus neoformans. 78. Curr Mol Med. 2005 Jun;5(4):413-20. The cellular responses induced by the capsular polysaccharide of Cryptococcus neoformans differ depending on the presence or absence of specific protective antibodies.Vecchiarelli A. 79. J Immunol. 2001 Sep 15;167(6):3316-23. Predominant role of toll-like receptor 2 versus 4 in Chlamydia pneumoniae-induced activation of dendritic cells. 80, J Immunol. 2003 Aug 1;171(3):1441-6. Heat-killed Brucella abortus induces TNF and IL-12p40 by distinct MyD88-dependent pathways: TNF, unlike IL-12p40 secretion, is Toll-like receptor 2 dependent. 81. Nat Immunol. 2000 Dec;1(6):502-9. OmpA targets dendritic cells, induces their maturation and delivers antigen into the MHC class I presentation pathway 82. J Clin Invest. 2005 Nov;115(11):3265-75. Epub 2005 Oct 13. Endocytosis of HIV-1 activates plasmacytoid dendritic cells via Toll-like receptor-viral RNA interactions. 83. The Journal of Immunology, 2008, 180: 1405-1413. Suppression of Mature Dendritic Cell Function by Regulatory T Cells In Vivo Is Abrogated by CD40 Licensing1 84. Mucosal Immunology (2008) 1, 156-168 The contribution of PARs to inflammation and immunity to fungi http://www.nature.com/mi/journal/v1/n2/full/mi200713a.html 85. Yakugaku Zasshi. 2007 Feb;127(2):319-26. [Uniqueness of the mucosal immune system for the development of prospective mucosal vaccine] 86. The Maturing Immune System: Implications for Development and Testing HIV-1 Vaccines for Children and Adolescents http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/524225_print 87. J Immunol. 2004 May 1;172(9):5240-8. Antigen-specific T cell repertoire modification of CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells. 88. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2007 Jul;4(4):323-40. Oral vaccination: where we are? 89. Methods. 2006 Feb;38(2):150-7. Mucosal immunization using recombinant plant-based oral vaccines. 90. Immunol Cell Biol. 2005 Jun;83(3):257-62. Oral hepatitis B vaccine candidates produced and delivered in plant material. 91. AIDS 1998, 12: 2387-2396 Immune activation in HIV-infected African individuals 92. J. Exp. Med., Volume 188, Number 12, December 21, 1998 2205-2213 Viral Immune Evasion Due to Persistence of Activated T Cells Without Effector Function 93. The Journal of Infectious Diseases 1999; 179: 859 -870 Shorter Survival in Advanced Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection Is More Closely Associated with T Lymphocyte Activation than with Plasma Virus Burden or Virus Chemokine Coreceptor Usage 94. Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Aug 1;13(15 Pt 1):4345-54. A unique subset of CD4+CD25highFoxp3+ T cells secreting interleukin-10 and transforming growth factor-beta1 mediates suppression in the tumor microenvironment. 95. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2007 Sep;14(9):1127-37. Epub 2007 Jul 18. Dendritic cell function during chronic hepatitis C virus and human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection. 96.Eur J Immunol. 2007 Jul;37(7):1887-904. Impairment of dendritic cell function by excretory-secretory products: a potential mechanism for nematode-induced immunosuppression. 97. Nature Dec 5;420:502-507. Belkaid Y, Piccirillo CA, Mendez S, Shevach EM, Sacks DL. CD4+CD25+regulatory T cells control Leishmania major persistence and immunity. 98. Current Opinion in Immunology Published online 2/7/04 Development and function of CD25+CD4+ regulatory T cells 99. Current Opinion in Immunology Published online 2/11/04 Immunoregulatory T cells in tumor immunity 100. Cancer Res. 2003 Aug 1;63(15):4516-20. Human CD4(+) CD25(+) Regulatory T Cells Suppress NKT Cell Functions. 101. J Virol. 2002 Aug;76(15):7528-34. Selective loss of innate CD4(+) V alpha 24 natural killer T cells in human immunodeficiency virus infection. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Endnote Regarding Production of GAIA ICS Antigen GMP Production of GAIA ICS cell-derived Peptide and Peusdoprotien antigen for R & D and clinical trials. Followed up with full scale production in transgenic plants should result in high yield, low cost, high quality and stable for many years at room temperatures GAIA ICS Peptide and Peusdoprotein antigen to be used in a Global HIV-1 Vaccination Campaign. J Drug Target. 2003;11(8-10):539-45. Advantageous features of plant-based systems for the development of HIV vaccines. Journal of the American College of Nutrition, Vol. 21, No. 90003, 212S-217S (2002) Foods as Production and Delivery Vehicles for Human Vaccines Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses, Volume 1, Number 1, January 2007 , pp. 19-25(7) A launch vector for the production of vaccine antigens in plants Methods. 2006 Feb;38(2):150-7. Mucosal immunization using recombinant plant-based oral vaccines. Immunol Cell Biol. 2005 Jun;83(3):257-62. Oral hepatitis B vaccine candidates produced and delivered in plant material. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2005 Jul;2(4):719-28. Delivery of plant-derived vaccines. Int J Parasitol. 2003 May;33(5-6):479-93. Plant-based vaccines. Vaccine Volume 24, Issue 5 , 30 January 2006, Pages 691-695 Oral immunogenicity of a plant-made, subunit, tuberculosis vaccine J Biotechnol. 2005 Oct 17;120(1):121-34. Epub 2005 Jul 18. Plants as bioreactors: a comparative study suggests that Medicago truncatula is a promising production system. Transgenic Res. 2007 Jun;16(3):315-32. Epub 2007 Apr 14.Production of vaccines and therapeutic antibodies for veterinary applications in transgenic plants: an overview. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Apr 17;104(16):6864-9. Epub 2007 Apr 11. Smallpox subunit vaccine produced in Planta confers protection in mice. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007 Apr;1102:121-34. Bioproduction of therapeutic proteins in the 21st century and the role of plants and plant cells as production platforms. BMC Biotechnol. 2007 Feb 26;7:12. Expression, intracellular targeting and purification of HIV Nef variants in tobacco cells. J Biotechnol. 2007 Feb 20;128(3):512-8. Epub 2006 Nov 16. Multimerization of peptide antigens for production of stable immunogens in transgenic plants. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2006 Apr;5(2):249-60. Plant-derived vaccines: a look back at the highlights and a view to the challenges on the road ahead.Thanavala Y, Huang Z, Mason HS. Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA. yasmin.thanavala@roswellpark.org The sobering reality is that each year, 33 million children remain unvaccinated for vaccine-preventable diseases. Universal childhood vaccination would have profound effects on leveling the health inequities in many parts of the world. As an alternative to administration of vaccines by needle and syringe, oral vaccines offer significant logistical advantages, as the polio eradication campaign has demonstrated. Over the past decade, the expression of subunit vaccine antigens in plants has emerged as a convenient, safe and potentially economical platform technology, with the potential to provide a novel biotechnological solution to vaccine production and delivery. As this technology has come of age, many improvements have been made on several fronts, as a growing number of research groups worldwide have extensively investigated plants as factories for vaccine production. This review attempts to highlight some of the achievements over the past 15 years, identify some of the potential problems and discuss the promises that this technology could fulfill. PMID: 16608424 ================================================================ The Hunger Site: A Click a day sends FREE FOOD to fight World Hunger and Malnutrition Diseases http://www.thehungersite.com/clickToGive/home.faces?siteId=1 ================================================================ The Hunger Site: A Click a day sends FREE FOOD to fight World Hunger and Malnutrition Diseases http://www.thehungersite.com/clickToGive/home.faces?siteId=1 Return to Top comment: AIDS Healthcare Foundation provocation not based in fact by Mike Barr ?? [Comment posted 2008-03-27 02:59:06] AIDS Healthcare Foundation is widely reviled in the AIDS community for their self-serving proclamations, and this appears to be one of them.
Their statement that "rapid scale-up of HIV testing worldwide would likely prevent millions of new infections" requires better informed scrutiny. As scientists they must know that HIV testing has not been shown to prevent transmission except in the case of serodiscordant couples. Surely they must be aware of the thin ice they skate on when they claim: "Achieving universal access to treatment would make the most significant contribution to a drop... in HIV transmission rates worldwide." There is not one iota of scientific evidence that this is so! And there are other contentious (or flat out fictional) points in their 3/23 Baltimore Sun opinion piece: * "A vaccine against a retrovirus, the family of viruses HIV belongs to, has never been successfully developed." Not true. There is a licensed vaccine against the feline retrovirus FIV. It isn't perfect, isn't always used, but it does exist. * "If the majority of the 250,000 undiagnosed cases were diagnosed over the next 5 years, new infections could be reduced by as much as 50 percent." Perhaps. But this is pure (and rhetorically self-serving) speculation. The AHF leaders rightly point out that transmission is reduced in couples where the viral load is kept in check with drugs. The viral load is highest, however, during the first weeks of infection when conventional tests would often give a false negative result. Once a conventional test is positive, the window for most likely transmission may already be closed. Simply increasing testing without improving sensitivity to detect new infections is unlikely to produce the hoped for effect. *"Scale-up of treatment worldwide must be our highest priority." Again, highly contentious. Treatment with a combination of costly and harsh antiretroviral medicines must be maintained for a lifetime?without interruption. While early and continuous combination antiretroviral treatment represents a significant boon to commercial entities with a vested interest in keeping patients on lifelong drug regimens, long term toxicity and drug resistance may undermine this strategy. A short-term focus on drugs to the exclusion of next-generation preventative measures (including vaccines) could create an even worse situation 10-20 years down the road. The final irony of all this is particularly rich given African representatives' reaction to the Healthcare Foundation publicity stunt: ?[The call] to redirect vaccine funding into testing and treatment... stirred consternation in the AIDS community, especially in Africa, where the bulk of the pandemic's 33 million victims live and where ?AIDS is not an abstract thing,? said vaccine researcher Glenda Gray of the University of Witwatersrand, South Africa. ?Any call to halt vaccine funding is like abandoning Africa.?" (WSJ 3/26) One cannot help wondering how in touch with the African communities they purport to serve these AIDS Healthcare Foundation people really are?and whose interests lie foremost in their minds. Return to Top comment: There is at least one good reason why no vaccine has surfaced... by Jonas Moses [Comment posted 2008-03-26 18:42:17] To "The Scientist," and its readership...
In a sentence: there is to be found no hard evidence of a single retrovirus, so-called "HIV." Why can't a vaccine be created? Simply put, you cannot vaccinate against something that does not appear to exist in nature. I propose this as a good place to begin the discussion... As a mainstream, conservative scientist and former medical clinician, as a member of the international medical Media, as the son of world-class and highly respected scientists, I feel it is time to place all cards on the table, in questioning the veracity of all claims made about HIV and AIDS. First, I want to be clear that I was trained in, and raised on, the Scientific Method. This then, is the source of my concern and my reason for questioning what has been, immutably, cast in stone as The Truth: "HIV causes AIDS" From the recent Washington Post article: "People have been suffering immune-activating infections and getting vaccines for years, and there has never been evidence that those events increased a person's risk of acquiring HIV. These vaccine trials would be odd places to first notice such a thing. Furthermore, people in the STEP study who got the vaccine did not have more activated CD4 cells than people who got placebo -- something that Merck vaccine executive Mark B. Feinberg called "kind of an interesting and unexplained observation."" -- Interesting and unexplained...indeed. and ""There is something very, very peculiar" going on in the vaccine trials, said Anthony S. Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which sponsored them." -- Very peculiar...and highly suspect. and "The multiple surprises have reminded researchers how much they still do not know about HIV's biology. It has also focused attention on questions they never asked." I find it odd that Edward Jenner (1749-1823), was able to derive a vaccine against smallpox - long considered to be the most deadly and persistent human pathogenic disease (up until the 1970's, in fact) - in a matter of weeks, with virtually no resources (read: "outside funding"), little in the way of technology, and no background in Virology. Yet, with billions of dollars in funding, hundreds of laboratories and thousands of scientists, leading-edge medical and scientific technologies, highly-evolved fields of Cell/Molecular Biology and Virology, and twenty-five years of intensive study, "HIV" biology is still poorly understood and there is no vaccine or successful treatment. Something is very wrong here. Consider the following, well-documented facts: 1) The so-called retrovirus, "HIV," has never been successfully isolated. In truth, there are several organizations, world-wide, prepared to pay hefty sums of money to the first individual or group who can present unequivocal documentation of "HIV." This money has not been awarded to any person or group, to date. It remains unclaimed. Why is this the case, if "HIV" is everywhere? I refer you to the World-wide Web for validation of this claim...it is quite easy to verify. 2) No one has ever successfully utilized Koch's Postulates in validating "HIV" as an infectious agent. Yet, remarkably, after some 125 years, Koch's Postulates remain the "gold standard" in the determination of infectious disease agents. 3) Every single one of the test kits used in "identifying" HIV infection is inferential, ergo indirect; furthermore, the manufacturers of these kits acknowledge and publish that the kits are "not to be used" in the identification of HIV infection. Why...they must know something that all of the AIDS researchers seem not to know? 4) Consider the use of PCR (polymerase chain reaction) in identifying "HIV" infected blood or tissues: no less than the inventor of PCR, Nobel Laureate Kelly Mullis, has stated that PCR cannot be used in identifying "HIV." I wonder why? Does he know something that the AIDS researchers do not? 5)Not one of the 60-odd failed "HIV" vaccines has succeeded in evoking antibodies. Indeed, there is evidence that such vaccines may do real harm to human beings. 6) Consider also, that there are no less than 15 other hypotheses (likely, many more) for what causes AIDS-like disease processes. Noting that AIDS is NOT a disease, in and of itself, but is a so-called syndrome, defined by some 40-plus existing diseases, why do so many scientists, politicians, Media professionals and government officials refer to AIDS as if it were a single disease? Why, also, are so many among the general public allowed to go along with this non-fact, blithely ignorant of the truth? Why does no one among the AIDS "community" scientists, clinicians and non-medical "experts" correct this misconception, with a high-profile public statement? Is it possible they do not want the populace to begin questioning? Note also that these so-called AIDS-defining illnesses can and do sicken and kill human beings, in the absence of any precursor retrovirus (HIV). Given that several, if not most, of these other noteworthy AIDS hypotheses have been around for as long as the HIV=AIDS hypothesis, and that many if not all of these other hypotheses are far better at explaining the syndrome than "HIV=AIDS," why is more money not being poured into researching those avenues? Why indeed, in the face of some 25 years and billions of dollars having been spent on failed HIV=AIDS research? I am impressed with the elaborate explanations for why this virus is so elusive and difficult to treat: - capable of mutating at a furious rate, while maintaining its integrity as an infectious and disease-causing virus? - capable of multiplying in the very T-Cell hosts it supposedly kills off? - capable of laying dormant for 40 years or killing an infected host in a matter of months...and a plethora of other, intriguing-if- nonsensical claims. "Infected" (ie "tested positive") individuals may show no viral load and have completely normal T-Cell counts, may never develop any diseases, may never experience so much as a cold, and live healthy and productive lives; meanwhile, others maypresent with sky-high viral load and nearly decimated immune systems; still others may test "negative" (classed "ideopathic", and pushed into a dark corner) but develop multiple so-called AIDS-defining illnesses. Sero-discordant couples may have unprotected sex for years, with no conversion of the "uninfected" partner. "HIV-positive" mothers may deliver "HIV-negative" offspring, even though they share the same blood supply...for nine months. These are but a mere tip of the iceberg, for a disease hypothesis that abounds in bizarre and wide-ranging inconsistencies. Miracles, all. Amazing as well that there is no animal model: Even the chimpanzees who were "infected" with so-called HIV, some 25 years ago, had to be retired to a $25 million habitat, not long ago, because none of them became ill. More amazing that many AIDS patients also happen to be chronic drug-abusers/addicts, alcoholics and smokers and/or already have hemophilia, tuberculosis, malaria, hepatitis, cancer, syphilis and a plethora of other immune-compromising diseases and disorders, and/or are immune-compromised because of starvation, tainted drinking water and lack of basic health care (think countries like Africa), and yet no one is pointing to these preexisting conditions (all of which can cause AIDS-like diseases) as causal. Amazing...and foolhardy. Why, indeed, is it so difficult for thinking scientists and physicians to appreciate that the highly toxic drug regimens foisted upon uninformed (and often unwilling) patients are likely doing more to destroy their immune systems than any virus might? There is a growing disconnect between the practice of good science and medicine, and those who promote "HIV" as the sole and most likely cause of AIDS. Please consider questioning this dogma - no longer even Science dogma, as it has truly become a religion for those who follow it - for, the best-informed and most balanced view is bound to be the most successful, in combating real disease, with real Science and real Medicine. In case you are wondering, no...I am not an AIDS dissident, and do not identify myself with any such groups. I am a conservative and skeptical scientist, who has stumbled across the inconvenient and disturbing truth that the facts about HIV do not add up. The more I read, the more convinced I am this is plainly and simply a case of practicing bad Science and bad Medicine. I would like to invite any and all medical and scientific professionals to appear as a guest on one of my weekly television programs, to discuss this matter...on the merits. If you are interested in being interviewed, regardless of how you feel about the HIV=AIDS hypothesis, I welcome a contact from you. So long as you are willing to engage in a reasoned and unemotional scientific conversation about the topic, you are invited to join the discussion. My programs are peer-to-peer, worldwide, which means the conversations reach scientists, clinicians, medical ethicists, academicians, Industry leaders, biomedical innovators, Public Health/Public Policy professionals, government officials and other Media professionals in over 35 countries. I am sincerely interested in arranging a forum for discussion, and would like to include any and all perspectives. Please know that my professional credibility as moderator of such a television series rests upon my ability to remain neutral to the conversation at hand, and I will go to great lengths to protect the views and perspectives of my guests, regardless, so long as they agree to adhere to the discussion of peer-reviewed articles , from widely accepted and respected journals, and to independently reproducible (and reproduced) experimental studies. To reach me, regarding being included in this professional on-air forum, or to be considered as a potential guest for any of my medical programs, please send me an email via the InTime TV Network: OntheEdge@intimetv.com Sincerely, Jonas Moses, PhD PA [Biomedical Engineering innovator of diagnostics, therapeutics and devices in the treatment of cancer and other disease processes; cancer and cell biologist and former medical clinician (in Ophthalmology), Medical/Science Liaison and TV talk show Host] Return to Top comment: HIV Vaccines: Back to Basics? ? Why not a fundamental paradigm shift? by ROULETTE W SMITH [Comment posted 2008-03-26 17:26:36] New blood? ? Young investigators / researchers? ? Raise the payline for R01 NIH grants? ? More resources (funds) for HIV vaccine research? Adel Mahmoud said, "This is not just sloganeering, ? The next step is going to come from outside this room." An outside voice need not be young, new or a person with a long-standing NIH track record for R01 grantsmanship! Why not consider a fundamental shift in paradigms as proposed in Smith, R. Wm (2001). The Durban Declaration, The Scientist 15(2):39 (http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/12233/)?? To wit, why not explore multivalent vaccines against nascent pathogens which would be opportunistic. This indirect approach to vaccination against lentiviruses is supported by Bjorn Sigurdsson?s 3 classic 1954 British Veterinary Journal reports on slow infections in sheep. Ethological reports of AIDS-like disease in Rhesus monkeys at the UC Davis Primate Center also are instructive and support this approach [see Lerche, N. W, Henrickson, R. V., Maul, D. H., and Gardner, M. B. (1984). Epidemiologic Aspects of an Outbreak of Acquired Immunodeficiency in Rhesus Monkeys (Macaca mulatto), Laboratory Animal Science 34(2):146-150]. At the very least, a shift in paradigms is likely to teach investigators more about how nascent (i.e., relatively uncommon) pathogens activate HIV in contrast to common pathogens. Return to Top comment: We cannot Lose!! by NITHIANANDA SELLIAH [Comment posted 2008-03-26 11:44:34] It has been a frustrating experience for HIV vaccine researchers. I am not a HIV vaccine researcher, yet I am involved in basic HIV biology research in an academic institution. We cannot let HIV win the war! I agree with the suggestion at the meeting that NIAID should encourage young investigators to pursue HIV vaccine research. Funding has been the major question in every academic scientists' mind today. How NIAID is going to increase the funding, when federal govt. did not increase NIH funding budget? We do need new thinking and new approach to HIV vaccine. Can someone convince the private foundations to increase the funding for HIV vaccine? Comment on this blog |