Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Compared with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), little is known about the susceptibility of HIV-2 to antibody neutralization. We characterized the potency and breadth of neutralizing antibody (NAb) responses in 64 subjects chronically infected with HIV-2 against three primary HIV-2 strains: HIV-2(7312A), HIV-2(ST), and HIV-2(UC1). Surprisingly, we observed in a single-cycle JC53bl-13/TZM-bl virus entry assay median reciprocal 50% inhibitory concentration (IC(50)) NAb titers of 1.7 × 10(5), 2.8 × 10(4), and 3.3 × 10(4), respectively. A subset of 5 patient plasma samples tested against a larger panel of 17 HIV-2 strains where the extracellular gp160 domain was substituted into the HIV-2(7312A) proviral backbone showed potent neutralization of all but 4 viruses. The specificity of antibody neutralization was confirmed using IgG purified from patient plasma, HIV-2 Envs cloned by single-genome amplification, viruses grown in human CD4(+) T cells and tested for neutralization sensitivity on human CD4(+) T target cells, and, as negative controls, env-minus viruses pseudotyped with HIV-1, vesicular stomatitis virus, or murine leukemia virus Env glycoproteins. Human monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) specific for HIV-2 V3 (6.10F), V4 (1.7A), CD4 binding site (CD4bs; 6.10B), CD4 induced (CD4i; 1.4H), and membrane-proximal external region (MPER; 4E10) epitopes potently neutralized the majority of 32 HIV-2 strains bearing Envs from 13 subjects. Patient antibodies competed with V3, V4, and CD4bs MAbs for binding to monomeric HIV-2 gp120 at titers that correlated significantly with NAb titers. HIV-2 MPER antibodies did not contribute to neutralization breadth or potency. These findings indicate that HIV-2 Env is highly immunogenic in natural infection, that high-titer broadly neutralizing antibodies are commonly elicited, and that unlike HIV-1, native HIV-2 Env trimers expose multiple broadly cross-reactive epitopes readily accessible to NAbs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kong et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: