Nothing made the world highly concerned about the immune system, what are its components? How does it work?, better than the emergence of HIV in the 80s. It’s a disaster, but made us know more about the immune system. Anatomy of AIDS virus

HIV’s target is CD4 receptors, which are present mostly on T-helper cells. It has glycoprotein 120 (Why do they call it 120 any way?! Is it the UV absorption again?! Or maybe it has 120 amino acids?!) It’s on its envelope. By recognition & binding to the CD4 receptors, it kills the T-helper which result in suppression of the whole cell-mediated immunity mechanism. It’s like cutting the snack’s head off. T-helper cells are responsible for giving signals (Interleukins) to other members of the IS so they can kill the viruses. By the whole suppression idea, the IS is turned off, the human body will be opened like your friend’s heart to you, to all possible invaders of m.o.

When we talked about HIV, the professor told us:” You wanna fight HIV, young docs full of enthusiasm, block its binding site, so it can’t bind to CD4 anymore.” I remembered the wise man’s words when I surveyed this article “Antibodies to the CD4-binding site of HIV-1 gp120 suppress gp120-specific CD4 T cell response while enhancing antibody response” about studying the effect of monoclonal anti-bodies against only the highly conserved part of the gp 120 (The binding site). We know that after exposure to HIV, the IS produces Ab against gp 120 to neutralize it, but the HIV tends to change the gp 120, so it can’t fit with the neutralizing Ab, moving on to more destruction. With those highly specific binders, I thought it’ll be the ultimate success.

Unfortunately, the research group made in vivo (in mice) & in vitro studies using the normal virus & another recombinant one with no CD4bs. They called it CD4bs+ Env & CD4bs- Env (Like with or without cheese). They found that the Anti-CD4bs mAb have high neutralizing activity, they raised the Ab titer (mainly IgG but not IgM). But they hinder the ability of the proteolytic enzymes/ the degrading mechanisms of phagocytes/ T-helper response to the envelope Ag/ the ability of Antigen presenting cells & MHC II to present the Ag. Let’s think about it…. They can only present the virus’s Ag, not the gp120/anti-CD4bs complexes. This is too long in writing, how about presenting? Just kidding, It’s about that the Ag is already covered, so it’s useless to be presented.

This is so awful, even the last approach to bind HIV didn’t work. What are the researchers gonna do? What’s the next move? We’ll find out soon.

Image credits:
Anatomy of AIDS virus:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Reader
  • LinkedIn
  • BlinkList
  • Reddit
  • Tumblr
Tags: ,
2 Responses to “Anti-CD4bs mAb: Why the wise man’s vision didn’t work?!”
  1. dr_rose_kabeel says:

    HIV always remindes me I didn’t understand immunology well.

    i don’t understand the part , they present the viruse Ag not the gp120?

  2. Just refresh the Immunology info:
    MHC + Ag presenting cells play the role as carriers of Ag (small fragments of the m.o.) so the T-helper can see them, coz they’re intracellular, they have to appear on the surface so T-helper or T-cytotoxic can recognize & neutralize them. Here’s the link of a more illustrating picture.

    Apparently, the complex of HIV + the binding site specific antibody can’t be presented, coz the Ag (gp 120) which is supposed to be presented is bounded to the Anti-CD4bs mAb.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment. Login »