Immunotherapy for Infectious Diseases

Immunotherapy for Infectious Diseases Immunotherapy for Infectious Diseases

ibvacunas.com
from ibvacunas.com More from this publisher
10.02.2013 Views

From: Immunotherapy for Infectious Diseases Edited by: J. M. Jacobson © Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ 181 10 Active Immunization as Therapy for HIV Infection INTRODUCTION Spyros A. Kalams Emerging data over the past several years have confirmed the role of the HIV-specific immune response in determining viral setpoint and delaying HIV disease progression. Despite advances in the control of HIV-1 viremia with highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), these therapies carry the risk of toxicities with long-term use. This has led to accelerated efforts designed to augment HIV-1-specific immune responses in infected subjects with the hope that the use of antiretroviral medications can be reduced or eliminated. This chapter reviews the current state of knowledge regarding the immune responses directed against HIV and summarizes efforts that are in progress or that will be under way to augment these responses in infected individuals. IMMUNE RESPONSES IN CONTROLLED CHRONIC VIRAL INFECTIONS Although there are examples of acute infections with viruses that are subsequently cleared by the immune system (e.g., influenza), for several viral infections recovery from illness is the result of immune-based containment of viremia. Patients with acute Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection contain the initial infection with a vigorous immune response, yet despite almost uniform resolution of symptoms, the virus remains present for the life of the infected individual. In the presence of an intact immune response, viremia is contained, and disease does not recur. Evidence for the continued need for immune surveillance is provided by the well-documented occurrence of EBVassociated malignancies in patients on immunosuppressive agents, as well as the regression of tumors when immunosuppression is decreased (1,2). The lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) infection model in mice has been a useful tool for dissecting the roles of the humoral and cellular immune system in viral containment. After acute infection there are large expansions of CD8� T-cells (CTLs) and up to 70% of total CD8 T-cells are LCMV-specific 8 days after infection (3,4). Another important component of immune control is the virus-specific T-helper cell response. If CD4 T-cells are either absent by genetic knockout of CD4, or depleted by anti-CD4 antibodies CTL are still generated, but they decline during the chronic phase of infection. In this instance viremia is not controlled. These studies suggest that in this

182 Kalams model, immune control is mediated through CTL, but the ability of these cells to persist and maintain normal function is dependent on the presence of an intact CD4 T-helper cell response (5,6). IMMUNE CONTROL OF HIV-1 INFECTION HIV infection is almost invariably associated with progressive destruction of the immune system, but some patients are able to contain the virus for long periods in the absence of antiretroviral medications (7). Factors that can contribute to a persistently low viral load and a benign disease course include infection with attenuated viruses (8–10), and host genetic factors (11,12). However, these factors are not responsible for all cases of long-term nonprogressive infection, indicating that the host immune response is capable of mediating control of HIV replication. Both cellular and humoral immune responses have been described in HIV infection; however, the exquisite specificity of neutralizing antibodies for autologous virus has made it difficult to determine the role this arm of the immune system plays in maintenance of the viral setpoint (13). Although HIV-specific antibodies are easily detected after HIV infection, neutralizing antibodies are not commonly generated early after acute infection (14). Neutralizing antibody responses can be detected in some individuals and have been mapped to the V3 loop, which is involved with viral entry, and to the CD4 binding site. One limitation of neutralizing antibodies is that they typically recognize three-dimensional conformations of their epitopes, meaning that they are highly type-specific (15–17). Although a strong neutralizing antibody response might provide the best primary protection against HIV-1 infection, these responses have been extremely difficult to generate with vaccines (18–22). This also has implications for HIV-1 disease progression, in that viruses continue to evolve in the host and escape immune detection. Elegant studies have demonstrated that the majority of antibodies directed against HIV antigens are directed at nonneutralizing epitopes (23), which have been described as viral debris (18), that are not likely to exert an antiviral effect. This high degree of specificity may also lead to rapid escape from an initially effective neutralizing antibody response. The heavy degree of glycosylation of the viral envelope protein may be another factor that allows the virus to resist antibody-mediated inactivation (24,25). These factors are formidable hurdles to immune-based therapies meant to augment antibody responses. In a manner similar to other viral infections, CTLs are generated early during the course of acute HIV-1 infection. After infection of CD4� T-cells, viral proteins that are generated in the cytosol are degraded and presented as epitopic peptides (usually 9–11 amino acids in length) on the cell surface complexed to HLA class I molecules. CTLs recognize infected cells through the interaction of the T-cell receptor (TCR) with the HLA-epitope complex. This occurs prior to the assembly of progeny virions, a process that takes approximately 2.6 days. During this time, an infected cell is vulnerable to attack by CTL; if the cell is eliminated at this time, progeny virus will not be released (26,27). CTLs are also able to mediate antiviral effects through the elaboration of soluble factors that inhibit viral replication. These include the chemokines RANTES, macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-1� and MIP-1�, as well as other factors not

From: <strong>Immunotherapy</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Infectious</strong> <strong>Diseases</strong><br />

Edited by: J. M. Jacobson © Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ<br />

181<br />

10<br />

Active Immunization as Therapy <strong>for</strong> HIV Infection<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Spyros A. Kalams<br />

Emerging data over the past several years have confirmed the role of the HIV-specific<br />

immune response in determining viral setpoint and delaying HIV disease progression.<br />

Despite advances in the control of HIV-1 viremia with highly active antiretroviral therapy<br />

(HAART), these therapies carry the risk of toxicities with long-term use. This has<br />

led to accelerated ef<strong>for</strong>ts designed to augment HIV-1-specific immune responses in<br />

infected subjects with the hope that the use of antiretroviral medications can be reduced<br />

or eliminated. This chapter reviews the current state of knowledge regarding the immune<br />

responses directed against HIV and summarizes ef<strong>for</strong>ts that are in progress or that will<br />

be under way to augment these responses in infected individuals.<br />

IMMUNE RESPONSES<br />

IN CONTROLLED CHRONIC VIRAL INFECTIONS<br />

Although there are examples of acute infections with viruses that are subsequently<br />

cleared by the immune system (e.g., influenza), <strong>for</strong> several viral infections recovery<br />

from illness is the result of immune-based containment of viremia. Patients with acute<br />

Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection contain the initial infection with a vigorous immune<br />

response, yet despite almost uni<strong>for</strong>m resolution of symptoms, the virus remains present<br />

<strong>for</strong> the life of the infected individual. In the presence of an intact immune response,<br />

viremia is contained, and disease does not recur. Evidence <strong>for</strong> the continued need<br />

<strong>for</strong> immune surveillance is provided by the well-documented occurrence of EBVassociated<br />

malignancies in patients on immunosuppressive agents, as well as the<br />

regression of tumors when immunosuppression is decreased (1,2).<br />

The lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) infection model in mice has been<br />

a useful tool <strong>for</strong> dissecting the roles of the humoral and cellular immune system in viral<br />

containment. After acute infection there are large expansions of CD8� T-cells (CTLs)<br />

and up to 70% of total CD8 T-cells are LCMV-specific 8 days after infection (3,4).<br />

Another important component of immune control is the virus-specific T-helper cell<br />

response. If CD4 T-cells are either absent by genetic knockout of CD4, or depleted by<br />

anti-CD4 antibodies CTL are still generated, but they decline during the chronic phase<br />

of infection. In this instance viremia is not controlled. These studies suggest that in this

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!