Previous Article | Next Article 
Clinical Microbiology Reviews, April 2004, p. 370-389, Vol. 17, No. 2
0893-8512/04/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/CMR.17.2.370-389.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
DNA Vaccines against Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 in the Past Decade
Malavika Giri,1 Kenneth E. Ugen,2 and David B. Weiner3*
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine,3
Immunology Graduate Group, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104,1
Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, University of South Florida College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida 336122

SUMMARY
This article reviews advances in the field of human immunodeficiency
virus type 1 (HIV-1) and AIDS vaccine development over the last
decade, with an emphasis on the DNA vaccination approach. Despite
the discovery of HIV-1 and AIDS in humans nearly 20 years ago,
there is no vaccine yet that can prevent HIV-1 infection. The
focus has shifted toward developing vaccines that can control
virus replication and disease progression by eliciting broadly
cross-reactive T-cell responses. Among several approaches evaluated,
the DNA-based modality has shown considerable promise in terms
of its ability to elicit cellular immune responses in primate
studies. Of great importance are efforts aimed at improvement
of the potency of this modality in the clinic. The review discusses
principles of DNA vaccine design and the various mechanisms
of plasmid-encoded antigen presentation. The review also outlines
current DNA-based vaccine strategies and vectors that have successfully
been shown to control virus replication and slow disease progression
in animal models. Finally, it lists recent strategies that have
been developed as well as novel approaches under consideration
to enhance the immunogenicity of plasmid-encoded HIV-1 antigen
in various animal models.

INTRODUCTION
Obstacles to Vaccine Development
There are currently 40 million individuals in the world infected
with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and nearly 16,000 new
infections occur worldwide each day based on World Health Organization
estimates. The search for an effective vaccine to control the
AIDS pandemic is still continuing long after the discovery and
isolation of HIV some 20 years ago (
22,
156). This has been
due to several unique challenges that HIV-1 has presented which
have confounded vaccine development.
Attempts to develop a safe and effective AIDS vaccine have been slowed, in part, by the difficulty in clearly defining specific immune responses that can prevent infection and limit disease progression. The complex structure and life cycle, as well as the high mutation rate, of HIV-1 have provided further obstacles to the development of an effective vaccine. The conserved receptor- and coreceptor-binding sites on the viral envelope (Env) glycoproteins that engage in virus attachment and fusion to host membrane receptors are camouflaged by variable residues that are glycosylated (108). The conserved sites are also thermostably concealed (143). These features enable the virus to evade detection by cross-reactive antibody (Ab)-producing B cells that recognize the conserved sites. The conformational flexibility of gp120 may further decrease the efficiency of presentation of receptor-binding sites to the immune system by creating an entropic barrier that must be overcome or bypassed by Abs targeting receptor-binding regions (107). As a part of its life cycle, HIV-1 integrates into the genome of its host to form a latent provirus and escapes immune recognition by the absence of significant protein expression (63). The high error rate of the reverse transcriptase (158), combined with the rapid turnover of plasma virions (87), has further hindered the development of an effective vaccine by supplying a broad range of variants for selection and escape from both cellular and humoral immune responses (57, 153). Another consequence of its high mutation rate is the unusual degree of diversity of the virus. Presently at least 12 known genetic subtypes of HIV-1 which are rapidly diversified to yield intersubtype recombinants exist in humans (105, 135) and present an even greater challenge for development of a universal AIDS vaccine.
Attributes of an Ideal Vaccine
As with most prophylactic and/or therapeutic antiviral vaccines,
two potential sites of action for an HIV vaccine are viral entry
and viral replication. Viral entry can be inhibited by neutralizing
Abs that specifically target epitopes on the viral envelope,
while viral replication can be hindered by cell-mediated immune
responses that can potentially target any of the epitopes derived
from viral proteins produced during the viral life cycle, as
indicated in Fig.
1. An ideal HIV vaccine should ultimately
confer sterilizing immunity by eliciting the production of broadly
cross-reactive neutralizing Abs that block virus entry and aid
in clearance of the infection. To date, it has proved difficult
to generate vaccines capable of eliciting these specific Abs
(
153), for reasons discussed previously such as poor accessibility
of conserved receptor-binding sites, extensive glycosylation,
and antigenic variation of gp120 (
158). The interactions between
the virus membrane and host cell membrane are complex and involve
different fusion intermediates, as indicated in Fig.
2. Vaccines
need to elicit Abs that target unique complex epitopes as well
as trimeric fusion intermediates for efficient inhibition of
virus binding and entry. An understanding of the different possible
conformations of HIV-1 gp160 in the context of a monomer and
a functional envelope glycoprotein complex may enable the development
of newer, sophisticated envelope vaccine immunogens to prevent
HIV-1 infection. Presently, it seems most likely that HIV-1
vaccines can be developed which contribute to the containment
of the virus after infection by priming cellular immune responses.
These include induction of cross-reactive antiviral T cells,
particularly cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) that can kill virus-infected
cells. Such T-cell-based vaccines would not prevent infection
but can control virus replication. Several lines of evidence
indicate that a strong CD8 CTL response is critical for the
control of HIV-1 infection (
74,
170).
Three different mechanisms of CD8 T-cell-mediated control of
HIV infection are currently known: (i) cytolytic killing of
infected cells, (ii) secretion of soluble factors that suppress
viral replication (
114), and (iii) blocking of viral entry by
secreting chemokines, such as macrophage inflammatory protein
1

(MIP-1

), MIP-1ß, and RANTES (regulated on activation,
normal T-cell expressed and secreted), that compete with the
virus for binding to chemokine coreceptors (
69).
Recent T-cell epitope mapping studies have revealed a considerable intra- and intersubtype conservation among the
200 specific epitopes mapped for various proteins of the virus, providing an additional incentive to devise T-cell-based vaccines. In fact, the majority of the vaccine approaches currently under development are aimed at generating high levels of antiviral T cells.

ANIMAL MODELS FOR EVALUATION OF VARIOUS VACCINES
Vaccine efficacy studies are routinely assessed in animal models
following natural or experimental infection of animals with
animal lentiviruses such as HIV-1 and HIV-2 or following inoculation
of recombinants derived from these viruses or in the context
of HIV-1 transgenes (
133). Each of these approaches carries
certain advantages and disadvantages, as indicated below (Table
1).
Transgenic Mouse Models
Transgenic mouse models may be used to test the mechanism of
action of certain antiviral compounds in vivo, although to date
these studies have not been pursued. The dissimilarities between
the immune systems of transgenic mouse models and humans limit
their use in vaccine development.
SCID Mouse Models
SCID mice (mice with severe combined immune deficiency) effectively
lack an adaptive immune system (i.e., they have no functioning
T or B lymphocytes) and as such are permissive, when reconstituted
with human tissues such as liver and thymus and peripheral blood
leukocytes, for infection with HIV. To date, this model has
been utilized, with some degree of success, for testing anti-HIV-1
agents as well as assessing the potential in vivo HIV-1 neutralization
efficacy of some humanized and human monoclonal Abs (
139). In
principle, since human peripheral blood leukocyte-reconstituted
SCID mice synthesize human Abs, this model could be used to
assess the efficacy of different HIV-1 vaccine preparations
and delivery platforms. One problem with the use of this model
for vaccine testing, however, is the variability of reconstitution
and the small numbers of animals that can be developed for study
at any time. Nevertheless, this mouse model could be potentially
useful for assessing the efficacy of certain vaccines. The utility
of this model needs to be further explored.
Animal Lentivirus Models
The HIV-1 and HIV-2 isolates are members of the lentivirus family
that endemically infect nonhuman primate species in Africa.
These nonhuman primate viruses, known as simian immunodeficiency
viruses (SIVs), do not cause disease in their natural host species.
Depending on the SIV isolate used and the host macaque monkey
employed, they do cause AIDS to various degrees when inoculated
experimentally in Asian or cynomologous macaques (
71,
86,
160).
SIV-rhesus macaque models recapitulate several pathologic features of HIV-1 disease in humans. However, there is some dissimilarity in the genomic organization of SIV and HIV-1, as well as in important features of pathogenesis, that could affect vaccine efficacy. The SIV viral accessory protein Vpx is not found in HIV-1, while the vpu gene product in HIV-1 is not found in SIV and the functions of Vpr also differ between the two viruses. Furthermore, there are antigenic and structural differences between viral envelopes of SIV and HIV-1. While macrophage-tropic SIV and HIV strains utilize CCR5 as the chemokine coreceptor to facilitate viral entry, T-cell-tropic SIV strains do not always utilize CXCR4 as do T-cell-tropic HIV strains. These differences have limited the utility of the SIV-macaque model for evaluating HIV-1 envelope-based vaccine strategies. Progression to disease in macaques following SIV infection is a lot faster than in humans infected with HIV. Furthermore, the challenge doses of the virus used in these models are several orders of magnitude higher than the doses of HIV encountered normally by humans. It is important to consider these factors in making meaningful interpretations of the protective effects of vaccine strategies tested in this model.
Chimeric viruses that express HIV-1 envelope glycoproteins on SIV backbones, known as simian human immunodeficiency viruses (SHIVs) (92, 115, 116, 124), have been developed. Importantly, some of these viruses like SHIV-89.6P following passage in macaques have been shown to cause rapidly progressive AIDS-like disease in macaques (163). Some concern about using SHIV-89.6P to evaluate AIDS vaccines is that this virus has evolved to use only CXCR4 whereas most HIV-1 strains transmitted between humans use CCR5 as the principal coreceptor (62, 134, 171, 193). Additionally, macaques infected with pathogenic SHIV display a more rapid and higher peripheral CD4 T-lymphocyte loss in comparison to the CD4 T-cell loss induced by HIV-1 in humans. Interpretations regarding vaccine efficacy in SHIV-macaque models may not be relevant or applicable to humans in the context of HIV-1 infection due to these differences in host-virus interactions and disease patterns. Nonetheless, this remains an important and highly defined challenge model.
An effective HIV-1 vaccine for humans should be able to prevent the spread and expansion of R5 viruses early after virus encounter or infection. To this end, alternate models that use R 5 SHIVs such as SHIV-162P-macaque models are being developed (81). Macaque monkeys infected with SHIV-162P do not exhibit a rapid and precipitous loss of CD4 T cells (163). A recent study (194) using a SHIV-162P-macaque model has demonstrated the prevention of virus transmission to macaque monkeys by a vaginally applied monoclonal Ab to HIV-1 gp120. These models may also be useful to retest vaccine concepts that were shown to be effective in earlier SHIV-89.6 macaque models. A recent problem uncovered in these studies relates to the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) haplotype and spontaneous control of infection. (144, 186, 216). Some haplotypes can spontaneously control SIV and SHIV challenge. Therefore, haplotypes must be considered when designing vaccine studies in macaques.
HIV-1 Infection Models
Apart from humans, HIV-1 can also infect great apes such as
chimpanzees and bonobos. One HIV-1 infection model that has
been studied is the HIV-1-infected chimpanzee. This model facilitates
a direct preclinical analysis of candidate antiviral compounds
and vaccines. However, it has several weaknesses. Although vaccine
strategies have protected chimpanzees from infection by weakly
replicating HIV-1 isolates (
30), there is no or very little
detectable viral RNA in the plasma of animals infected chronically
with primary patient HIV-1 isolates. Additionally, these isolates
replicate poorly in chimpanzees and do not induce disease. To
date, only one chimpanzee has developed AIDS following HIV-1
infection (
149). There are species differences in the host response
to virus between primates and humans, as indicated by resistance
of chimpanzees to infection by CCR5-tropic isolates that cause
infection and disease in most humans (
149). Thus, the relevance
of vaccine protection in the chimpanzee model has been the subject
of considerable controversy. Questions arise regarding extrapolation
of the model to human infections, where disease is one outcome
of infection. In contrast, chimpanzee models of hepatitis B
that have had similar limitations have been effective for supporting
the development of vaccines against this viral agent. A pathogenic
HIV-1 isolate in chimpanzees that causes CD4 T-cell loss and
persistent viral loads has been recently characterized (
148)
and may yet provide an opportunity to assess vaccine efficacy
in a chimpanzee model of a pathogenic HIV-1 infection. Unfortunately,
major drawbacks of the chimpanzee model include its high cost
as well as the extreme scarcity of animals and the ethical issues
involved in using this animal species in lethal challenges.
At present, the weaknesses of using this model appear to outweigh
the potential benefits.
Another important limitation shared among the primate animal models is that the animals are not inbred. This generates diversity in challenge take and poses issues for immune monitoring. Further, the supply of animals for large-scale testing is limited. Nevertheless, these models have proven to be particularly powerful systems for study of AIDS models by providing the means of assessing the prophylactic and/or therapeutic efficacy of a variety of vaccines. The collective features of these systems teach us something important about each potential vaccine candidate.

EARLY VACCINE APPROACHES
Conventional vaccine approaches that have proven effective in
preventing disease from a variety of pathogens, such as live
attenuated virus (Sabin polio vaccine, measles vaccine, and
chickenpox vaccine), inactivated or killed vaccines (Salk polio
vaccine and hepatitis A vaccine), recombinant proteins (hepatitis
B vaccine), and toxoids (diphtheria vaccine), have been utilized
to various degrees in potential HIV vaccine strategies. However,
these strategies have significant risk that counters their success
in protecting against HIV-1 infections, as indicated (Table
2). Preliminary studies with the SIV-macaque model suggested
that genetically modified viruses that were infective but pathogenically
attenuated (
nef-deleted SIV) could serve as vaccines that prevented
subsequent infections with wild-type virus (
50). However, later
studies revealed that many newborn or adult monkeys infected
for long durations with such vaccine strains of virus may eventually
succumb to disease and die (
12). A similar occurrence was reported
for a group of Australian blood recipients infected with mutant
HIV lacking the same regulatory
nef gene that would be removed
from the vaccine virus (
109). None of these individuals developed
symptoms, and all maintained normal CD4 T-cell counts for more
than 10 years. However, follow-up data from these patients have
revealed T-cell declines remarkably similar to those heralding
AIDS in vaccinated monkeys infected with a pathogenically attenuated,
replication-limited HIV strain and that subsequently developed
an AIDS like disease (
89,
110). An AIDS vaccine must, ultimately,
be safe, and at present it seems that the genetically attenuated
live-vaccine approach is unlikely to uncouple the level of infectivity
needed to elicit protective immune responses from the pathogenicity
of infection. Therefore, efforts at developing live attenuated
HIV-1 vaccines are now minimal.
Inactivated viral vaccines assessed in the SIV-macaque model
have also yielded disappointing outcomes. These vaccines failed
to elicit broad and vigorous protective responses (
140). Moreover,
protection in this model was not demonstrated when the vaccine
and challenge virus strains were even slightly different genetically
or when the vaccinated monkeys were challenged shortly after
peak immunity was reached. Some studies have suggested that
the protection in this model may have reflected an experimental
artifact (
184). Inactivated vaccines evaluated in limited early-phase
human immunogenicity trials (
113) also have proven to be disappointing,
eliciting neither neutralizing antibodies nor cytotoxic T-lymphocyte
(CTL) responses, since they retained very little viral envelope
glycoprotein and additionally did not initiate protein synthesis
in cells. Therefore, as is the case for live vaccines, more
research is needed before inactivated HIV-1 immunogens can be
developed as vaccines.
The use of highly purified recombinant proteins or peptides as vaccines was tested in a nonhuman primate model using recombinant HIV envelope glycoprotein as an immunogen. Vaccinated animals were only modestly protected and only when the challenge virus and immunizing virus had the identical envelope glycoprotein sequence (25). Ab responses elicited in early-phase human trials were similarly modest in titer, and the Abs exhibited a restricted ability to neutralize the range of HIV isolates tested. Furthermore, as expected, these subunit immunogens did not elicit CTL responses. The results of a phase III study of the envelope immunogen, recombinant gp120 (rgp120), have been recently announced and showed that there was not a statistically significant reduction of HIV infection within the study population (93, 200). Another phase III study using the same immunogen is nearing unblinding. These results were suggested by the prior clinical studies. Despite their failure to demonstrate the desirable level of protection in vaccinees, these trials have greatly advanced HIV vaccine research and development by proving that a true phase III trial can be effectively designed, implemented, and completed. It is likely that the outcome of these studies will significantly influence the concept of envelope subunit immunogens and their implementation in HIV vaccine development studies. More recent studies attempting to develop designed envelope subunit immunogens are testing many exciting concepts and, while only in the early stages, are likely to influence vaccine design well beyond HIV vaccines (Fig. 2).

NOVEL VACCINE APPROACHES
The inability of traditional vaccine approaches to generate
a suitable vaccine for HIV-1 prompted the quest for the development
of novel vaccine strategies. Among the most promising of these
approaches is the use of live recombinant vectors and plasmid
DNA immunogens.
Live Vaccine Vectors
In the live vaccine vector technology, genes of HIV are molecularly
cloned into live, replication-competent or incompetent microorganisms
and immune responses develop to both the vector and to the HIV
open reading frame product carried by that vector. Such immunogens
have proven particularly useful for eliciting CTLs, since the
replicating vector produces HIV proteins intracellularly, allowing
them to enter the MHC class I processing pathway. In certain
cases, the vectors have been shown to directly target antigen
(Ag) to dendritic cells (DCs) (
6,
7,
8,
176,
217). Some live
viral vectors that are being developed for use as HIV vaccines
include several avian and mammalian poxviruses (
9,
19), rhabdoviruses
(
167), alphaviruses (
52), replication-defective adenoviruses
(
176), herpesviruses (
141), picornaviruses (
11), and adeno-associated
viruses (
118).
Recombinant vaccinia virus, tested as a vaccine candidate in nonhuman primates, was shown to elicit CTL responses to HIV and SIV proteins (173); however vaccinia virus may disseminate in immunocompromised humans, causing fatal encephalitis (162). Attenuated poxviruses such as modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA) and NYVAC, obtained by genetic deletions following serial passages of the parental strain, have been shown to elicit reasonable immune responses in nonhuman primate models and are soon to be evaluated as HIV vaccine vectors in early-phase human testing. Avian poxviruses such as the recombinant canarypox virus constructs have also undergone extensive human testing (58). These vectors have proven to be safe and immunogenic, and an efficacy trial for a recombinant canarypox virus immunogen in Southeast Asia is currently under consideration. In SHIV challenge models, impressive levels of virus containment and protection from disease have been achieved by both the adenovirus-based approach and a vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV)-based approach. These results have propelled the recombinant virus vector field to a higher level of promise and scrutiny. Furthermore, the use of adenovirus vectors to elicit cellular immunity in small phase II human studies appears encouraging. The E1- and E3-deleted replication-incompetent serotype 5 adenovirus (Ad5), has demonstrated impressive immunogenicity in both murine and nonhuman primate studies (176).
The presence of preexisting immunity to the vector presents a major challenge in using this approach. Nearly 45% of the U.S. population have neutralizing Abs that are specific for Ad5 (61). Individuals who are now receiving smallpox vaccinations will develop preexisting immunity to MVA. Utilization of higher vaccine doses, as well as heterologous prime-boost protocols, can overcome the problem of preexisting immunity. The preferred approach to overcome this problem is to immunize a vector-naive population. However, the existence of a vector-naive population would be practically improbable, given the high likelihood for exposure of an individual to the range of microorganisms in a lifetime. An alternate approach would be to immunize with an agent for which preexisting immunity does not exist, such as DNA. This establishes a memory T-cell pool for the antigen of interest. The live recombinant booster vector would then have to achieve only the minimum level of infection required to enhance the primed immune response. One could also use adenovirus isolates of unusual serotypes to which most humans have not been previously exposed or adenovirus isolates from nonhuman primate species to construct similar vaccines with comparable immunogenicity. It is likely that vectors derived from such viruses may not be immunogenic in humans since they do not naturally infect humans.
Alphaviruses employed in the construction of replicase-based DNA vaccines to increase Ag production from nucleic acid vaccines (85, 218) express Ag under the control of an alphavirus replicase enzyme that is used by the alphavirus to produce a very large number of viral copies. It was recently demonstrated (111) that replicase-based DNA vaccines could activate the innate antiviral host mechanism such as double-stranded RNA-dependent pathways (RNA-dependent protein kinase and 2'-5'-A synthetase or RNase L pathways), accounting for their heightened immunogenicity. Activation of these pathways in alphavirus-transfected cells leads to cellular apoptosis and cross-presentation of Ag, yet another mechanism that has previously been shown to stimulate the immune system (5, 43). Therefore, the use of replication-incompetent virus particles (replicons) or vectors to deliver either DNA or RNA vaccines has potential for facilitating immune priming in two ways: cross-priming and direct targeting of DCs. Furthermore, the induction of apoptosis represents an additional safety feature of replicase-based vaccines. Hence, construction of such DNA vaccines that deliver stronger "adjuvant-like" signals to the innate immune system would enable the development of more powerful vaccines while circumventing the side effects of strong adjuvants.
Bacterial vectors that can be administered orally to facilitate worldwide administration are also undergoing development. For example, Salmonella vectors have been developed for oral delivery of HIV antigens and have generated some interesting preclinical results (172). Recombinant Listeria monocytogenes has been evaluated as a vector to express the HIV Gag protein in murine models (65, 130, 131) and has successfully been shown to elicit Gag-specific CTL and CD4 T-cell mucosal responses following a systemic immunization (117). Macaque safety and immunogenicity studies using a highly attenuated L. monocytogenes vector expressing HIV gag produced by genetically disrupting genes required for the biosynthesis of the bacterial cell wall are about to begin. A recent study with mice (211) demonstrated that recombinant Shigella encoding p55 Gag can elicit Gag-specific immune responses to a comparable degree to naked DNA Gag-encoding plasmid when used as a priming agent or as a booster following an initial DNA plasmid prime. In these mice, intranasal delivery of recombinant Shigella elicited immune responses in the lungs in addition to the spleen. Additional studies with nonhuman primates are needed to address the utility of recombinant Shigella vectors for immunization against HIV-1. Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG), an attenuated preparation of Mycobacterium bovis, is also being explored as a vaccine vector candidate because it establishes a chronic, persistent infection like HIV and has proven to be safe in worldwide use. Limited studies with rhesus monkeys have indicated that infection with recombinant BCG can elicit AIDS virus-specific CTL responses (214). Overall, most of these live-vector approaches alone may elicit only the minimal level of cellular immunity thought by many AIDS researchers to be necessary to support clinical evaluation of these approaches. Accordingly, combination approaches may be very important.
Nucleic Acid-Based Vaccines
DNA-based vaccines and, to a lesser extent, RNA-based vaccines
have been investigated as potential HIV vaccine candidates.
mRNA transfection for Ag delivery to DCs has been used to induce
potent T-cell-based antitumor immunity in vivo and in vitro
(
28,
46,
47,
72,
145). Transfection of DCs with mRNA encoding
the HIV core protein Gag resulted in potent primary CD4 and
CD8 T-cell immune responses in an in vitro system (
201), with
the generation of frequencies of Ag-specific cells similar to
that observed in in vivo model systems (
130). This study demonstrated
an extremely efficient ex vivo delivery of encoded Ag to DCs
since Gag mRNA-pulsed DCs had expressed the encoded protein
in 90% of the transfected DCs. The mRNA transfection was also
shown to induce a DC maturation signal. This study represents
one of the few addressing the use of RNA plasmids as potential
vaccines. Further studies to evaluate the potential of RNA-based
vaccines are under way. The use of RNA vaccines circumvents
the requirement for entry of a plasmid into the nucleus prior
to being expressed, a challenge often encountered with DNA vaccine
strategies. However, one major drawback of RNA vaccines is the
inherent instability of RNA compared to DNA, particularly for
in vivo delivery. This instability is yet to be addressed. Hence,
the more clinically advanced strategy of the two nucleic acid-based
vaccine approaches and the more extensively applied in HIV vaccine
development is the DNA-based vaccine modality.

WHAT ARE DNA VACCINES AND WHY DO WE NEED THEM AGAINST HIV-1?
DNA-based immunization refers to the induction of an immune
response to a protein Ag expressed in vivo following the introduction
of vector-carried DNA encoding the polypeptide sequence. In
most cases, these vaccines can be designed simply. The transcription
unit in a plasmid DNA vaccine encodes the antigen of interest
that is expressed by a promoter such as the cytomegalovirus
or ß-actin promoter. The viral cytomegalovirus promoter
currently appears to be an excellent choice for attaining reasonable
Ag expression (
186), as well as with limiting safety concerns.
A poly(A) tract is incorporated into the 3' end of the sequence
to ensure mRNA stability and proper translation of the transcribed
gene product. The first reported use of this vaccine modality
for HIV was by Wang et al. (
195). Plasmid DNA can be injected
into skeletal muscle or inoculated as plasmid-coated gold beads
by a gene gun into the epidermis. The protein is expressed in
transfected mammalian cells, including macrophages and DCs,
and enters into both the MHC class I and II processing pathways,
where it can support the expansion of both humoral and cellular
immune responses (
40,
54,
136,
186,
205). The use of plasmid
DNA offers many potential vaccine advantages, including quick
and easy manufacturing, better quality control, and nonintegration
of the plasmid DNA. The rates of integration-induced mutation
in animal models were found to be much lower than the rates
of spontaneous mutation for a mammalian genome (
129,
147). Thus,
DNA vaccine vectors, in addition to being safer, retain the
advantages associated with using live vectors such as immunogenicity
and ensuring delivery of the Ag protein in its correct and native
conformation. Additionally, these vaccines are heat stable and
easily transportable when stored in lyophilized form and can
be engineered to express artificial immunogens and coexpress
immunomodulatory proteins. Their simplicity of design and development
of DNA vaccines and the power they bring to the development
of subunit vaccines that are expressed in cells have made them
extremely popular over the past decade. This, accompanied by
their ability to prime both CD4 and CD8 responses, has made
DNA vaccines a particularly valuable modality in the design
of HIV-1 vaccines. Most important, however, for HIV vaccine
development has been their ability to modulate viral replication
in primate challenge systems.

MECHANISMS OF ANTIGEN PRESENTATION
There are currently three proposed mechanisms for antigen presentation
and immune cell activation following DNA plasmid administration,
as shown in Fig.
3.
Lymphocyte Priming by Transfected Somatic Cells
Somatic cells such as myocytes or keratinocytes express MHC
class I constitutively, and myocytes express protein (
147) and
elicit CTL responses (
192) after being directly transfected
with DNA plasmids. These studies suggested that myocytes could
activate CD8 T cells directly. However, these cells do not express
conventional costimulatory molecules, and subsequent studies
to elucidate the mechanism of immune priming by muscle cells,
using bone marrow chimera experiments (
1,
189), provided clear
evidence that myocytes do not directly activate CTLs. Both keratinocytes
in the skin and myocytes may play a role in regulating the magnitude
and duration of Ag-specific responses by serving as Ag reservoirs.
Lymphocyte Priming by Transfected APCs
Ag-presenting cells (APCs) at the sites of immunization have
been proposed to prime immune cells, including CD4 T cells,
CD8 T cells, and B cells, following direct transfection (
16,
152). Professional APCs such as epidermal Langerhans' cells,
macrophages, and interstitial DCs have been shown to contain
the plasmid following either intramuscular DNA immunization
(
35,
42) or gene gun delivery of plasmid (
45). Transfected DCs
that primed immune responses in these studies (
3,
34,
157) constituted
a mere fraction (0.4%) of the bone marrow cells, indicating
their high efficiency as well as their critical role in stimulating
antigen-specific immune responses following Ag expression in
them.
Cross-Presentation
A final mechanism that is now receiving considerable research
attention is cross-priming. The basis of cross-priming stemmed
from the observation that professional APCs could present Ag
or peptides derived exogenously rather than from the classical
endogenous pathway via the MHC class I pathway of Ag presentation
(
59,
80,
183,
190). For DNA vaccines, there is considerable
evidence (
3,
48,
66) to suggest that cross-priming may be another
mechanism of Ag presentation and priming of immune responses
following DNA delivery to cells. A test Ag expressed by transfected
myoblasts of one haplotype was able to cross-prime a CTL restricted
to another MHC haplotype when transferred to F
1 recipient mice
(
191). In fact, recent reports have elegantly demonstrated immune
activation via cross-priming by APCs that process secreted peptides
or proteins from phagocytosed apoptotic bodies (
4,
5,
169).
The cellular mechanisms by which cross-priming occurs are still
undefined, but they involve the internalization and intracellular
processing of exogenous protein Ags by APCs for presentation
by MHC class I molecules and priming of CTL responses (
26).
The source of Ag may be inoculated protein (derived from a vaccine),
proteins from a circulating pathogen, or proteins released by
cells (during an infection). This process may involve whole
protein, peptide fragments of these proteins, complexes with
heat shock proteins (
182), or apoptotic bodies from dying cells
(
4). A specialized subset of APCs containing functional transporter-associated
peptide-encoding genes (
90) have the ability to internalize
and process these Ags in a manner distinct from the classic
pathway of MHC class I presentation of newly synthesized proteins.
A DNA vaccine vector driven by a muscle-specific promoter was
capable of inducing a full range of immune responses, including
CTLs, in mice (
120). The fact that CTLs were primed by a DNA
vaccine that expressed Ag only in a non-APC (i.e., muscle cells),
regardless of which cells internalized the plasmid, indicated
that cross-priming was involved. Corr et al. (
48) used an expression-suppressible
plasmid system (a tetracycline-responsive promoter system to
regulate plasmid gene expression) to separate transport of the
plasmid and protein from the site of injection. Mice lacking
B and T cells (RAG
/ [recombinase-activating genes])
were immunized with and without the suppressing drug. Splenocytes
(APCs) from these mice were injected into recipient mice and
assessed for their ability to prime a CTL response. Recipient
mice that received splenocytes from mice without suppressive
treatment mounted a greater CTL response, suggesting that exogenous
transfer was important for the magnitude of the response. Additionally,
a CTL response was not induced when the site of plasmid injection
was ablated by amputation and the suppressing drug was subsequently
removed, indicating that the magnitude of the immune response
is dependent on Ag produced by transfected nonlymphoid cells.
Additionally, the immunogenic protein was expressed predominantly
locally at the site of injection and not in the draining lymph
nodes or spleen. These investigators also used bone marrow chimera
experiments to elegantly demonstrate that cross-priming played
a major role in eliciting the immune response to the Ag following
Ag-encoding DNA plasmid injection. In these experiments, they
generated chimeric mice that had a transgenic transcriptional
transactivator in their resident tissues or in their adoptively
transferred bone marrow. The transactivator was required for
high levels of plasmid DNA expression. They observed that wild-type
mice with transgenic bone marrow had weaker CTL and humoral
responses than did transgenic mice with wild-type bone marrow
after injection of plasmid DNA, supporting the importance of
cross-presentation wherein nonlymphoid tissues predominantly
expressed Ag peptides encoded by plasmid DNA, which were then
transferred to APCs to stimulate the bulk of the immune response.
Furthermore, B7.2 as a part of a DNA vaccine can allow for muscle-specific
T-cell priming (
1).
Thus, both direct transfection of APCs and cross-presentation have been shown to contribute to immune responses following plasmid transfection. The degree to which any of these mechanisms contribute to this DNA vaccine-driven immune expansion is still very much under investigation. However, it is clear that DNA vaccines, under the right circumstances, can produce immune responses mimicking live responses.

METHOD AND ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION
The nature of immune responses to DNA vaccines can be influenced
by the transfection method used (and therefore the types of
cells transfected) and the route of immunization (
192,
68,
51,
132) (Table
3). The most widely used strategies for application
of DNA vaccine vectors are intramuscular needle injections and
intradermal inoculation using a gene gun (
186). Noninvasive
methods of plasmid delivery shown to induce antigen-specific
immune responses involve topical application of the plasmid
to the skin or mucosa either orally (
56), intranasally (
78,
104,
106), or intravaginally (
14,
197). Delivery methods such
as intradermal injection, gene gun bombardment, and topical
application that targets the skin elicit a humoral response
associated with the production of Th2-type immunoglobulin A
(IgA) and IgG1 Ab isotypes (
31,
60,
67,
154). Intramuscular
injections, on the other hand, induce cell-mediated responses
that prime CTLs and elicit the production of Th1-type IgG2a
Ab (
177). Typically, intramuscular immunization via saline needle
injections requires 100- to 1,000-fold more DNA than does gene
gun immunization in order to generate an equivalent antibody
response (
154). One explanation for this difference in the efficiency
of DNA-elicited immunity is that cells take up DNA from extracellular
spaces following saline-DNA immunization (
51,
204,
205) while
gene gun DNA immunization directly transfects cells by depositing
DNA-coated gold beads within the cell cytoplasm (
55). Furthermore,
DNA inoculation into the skin and muscle transfects different
types of cells. Intramuscular delivery of DNA leads to the expression
of protein in skeletal muscle cells (
205). Professional APCs
such as macrophages or tissue DCs within skeletal muscle may
also be transfected (
42,
152). Intradermal saline injections
and gene gun delivery of DNA result in Ag expression primarily
from keratinocytes, although there have been reports of expression
from occasional dermal fibroblasts (
84,
161). Subcutaneous or
intradermal delivery of Ag can generate a strong cellular and
humoral response, while oral or intravenous delivery of the
same Ag can induce tolerance, resulting in unresponsiveness.
For instance, the influenza virus hemagglutinin (HA) protein
injected intramuscularly was shown to elicit a different anti-HA
Ab isotype profile from the one elicited when it was given intranasally
(
88).
The use of these different routes and methods of delivery of
DNA vaccines in general has been more potent in smaller animals
and not as effective in primates. Thus far, there have been
only a few cases where immune responses were noted in humans,
and the magnitude of these responses has not been substantial
(
33,
125,
199). One reason for this lack of efficiency in responses
may be a low uptake of DNA. To overcome this limitation, other
methods are being pursued in vivo.
The electroporation method is a physical method for delivery of compounds as well as genes to tissues in vivo. Confined short electrical pulses are delivered to target cells and tissues at levels which increase cell permeability without killing the cells, enabling hydrophilic drugs as well as DNA to pass through the cell membrane. Electroporation has been used to effectively deliver chemotherapeutic agents to tumors in animals and in humans. The first report that electroporation could transfect cells in vivo with plasmid DNA came when Titomirov et al. showed reporter gene expression in skin cells of mice (187). Since then, this technique has been applied to many other tissues in mice and rats, such as skin, liver, testis, brain, and skeletal muscle as well as tumor tissue such as melanoma and hepatocellular carcinoma (2, 83, 138), and clinical trials have been performed to test this therapy on melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and basal cell carcinoma (23). Animal and human studies have reported response rates of 45 to 99%. Due to its ability to express plasmid DNA for long periods, skeletal muscle has been frequently used in electroporation experiments for purposes ranging from reporter gene expression and cytokine expression to Ag expression for vaccines. Studies have also shown that electroporation can be used to deliver plasmid DNA in multiple treatments without causing adverse side effects. Although pain elicitation on electroporation has been reported by a segment of the patient population (166), experimental studies examining the pain response to electroporation in animals have not been done.
In vivo electroporation is capable of delivering plasmid DNA as an antitumor agent. This approach has been used for treatment of hepatocellular carcinomas, adenocarcinoma, breast tumors, and B16-F10 melanoma in rodent models. In the B16-F10 melanoma model, cures of established tumors with resistance to challenge has been demonstrated (82). Lohr et al. compared delivery by electroporation with the use of adenovirus vectors and found that electroporation was effective in delivering plasmid coding for interleukin-12 (IL-112) and, unlike adenovirus delivery, did not result in toxic side effects (119).
Recent studies have shown that electroporation is capable of efficiently delivering plasmid DNA to the skin. These studies demonstrated the feasibility of using this approach for DNA vaccination or for increasing the levels of a specific protein in serum. Delivery was successful in several models including rodents, pigs, and primates. Expression in these models was enhanced as much as 100-fold.
Delivery of plasmids by electroporation was found to enhance Ag expression in mice, guinea pigs, and rabbits (188, 203) and, more recently, in pigs (13). The immunogenicity of a potent HIV gag DNA vaccine was increased in mice, as seen by higher Ab titers, a substantial reduction in the dose of DNA required to induce an Ab response, and an increase in CD8 T-cell responses (203). The precise mechanism for the observed enhancement in the potency of DNA vaccines using electroporation is not yet known. One explanation could be the availability of higher levels of Ag for priming immune responses as a consequence of increased expression of encoded Ag in transfected myocytes. Electroporation appears to be well tolerated by the animals and is a simple technique that takes only a few seconds after inoculation.
These reports show the feasibility of electroporation for the delivery of plasmid DNA encoding therapeutic molecules. Therefore, such delivery systems may have utility for the delivery of potential HIV-1 vaccines. However, there has been some concern that electroporation could result in the integration of DNA from the plasmid into the host genome. If this were the case, it would effectively limit the utility of electroporation for the delivery of prophylactic DNA vaccines and could limit its utility for therapeutic vaccine purposes as well. It will be important to specifically address the question of integration.

EARLY TRIALS OF DNA-BASED VACCINES
The first DNA vaccines to be tested in humans were HIV-1 vaccines
(
125). Several groups have subsequently been directing their
efforts toward developing DNA vaccines for HIV-1. DNA vaccination
with HIV-1 Env-encoding plasmids was first shown to elicit Env-specific
humoral and cellular immune responses in mice (
122,
195,
198)
and macaques (
196). The immune responses in these studies were
dose dependent, could be boosted, and were long-lived (greater
than 6 months) (
174,
175). Chimpanzees vaccinated with DNA plasmids
containing HIV-1
env and
gag/
pol were completely protected against
high-dose challenge with the SF2 strain of HIV-1 (
30). However,
since HIV-1 SF2 replication in chimpanzees occurs at very low
levels and is nonpathogenic, the significance of this study
remains uncertain (
95). Rhesus macaques, immunized six times
with DNA encoding SIV Env, still remained unprotected against
intravenous challenge with the virulent SIV
mac251 isolate (
121,
125). However, the viral load was reduced and pathogenicity
was attenuated in the vaccinated animals. Another study showed
that DNA vaccination of pigtail macaques decreased viral loads
following intrarectal challenge with SIV
mne, a viral isolate
of intermediate pathogenicity (
77). Hence, while DNA vaccination
with HIV-1 or SIV antigens elicited humoral and cellular immune
responses in nonhuman primates, the immune responses did not
protect primates against infection by a pathogenic viral challenge.
However, these vaccines could protect in a nonpathogenic primate
model and could affect the viral load to various degrees following
challenge.
One limitation of DNA vaccines in most of these early studies was a lack of induction of a robust immune response due to insufficient uptake and expression of DNA. For HIV DNA vaccines, the problem of insufficient gene expression has been further exacerbated due to the inefficient expression of HIV-1 mRNAs outside of the context of the HIV-1 genome. New-generation DNA vaccines have circumvented this problem by using Rev and the Rev-responsive elements to facilitate the expression of HIV-1 mRNAs. In fact, Rev-dependent subgenomic splicing can now be used to express multiple HIV-1 proteins from single transcripts (9) and has the potential for expressing noninfectious virus-like particles (122). Still higher levels of HIV-1 gene expression have been achieved by optimizing the HIV-1 genes for the codons that are used most frequently in human cells (219). Such codon-optimized sequences can achieve exceptionally high levels of gene expression by designing transcripts as a single, efficiently translated mRNA. Codon-optimized sequences are designed to express either single-gene products (20) or fusion proteins (91). The majority of the codon-optimized vaccines under development have used the group-specific Ag (Gag) protein that is a major target for CD8 T cells in long-term nonprogressors (155). Other approaches tested to improve the potency of DNA vaccines have involved the use of use genetic adjuvants (44), conventional adjuvants (176), microspheres that increase DNA transfer to APCs (181), in vivo electroporation (203), immunostimulatory sequences such as CpG in the plasmid or vector modification to enhance Ag expression (91), peptides that target the Ag to sites of immune response induction (53), and codelivery of plasmids activating the death pathway (41, 168). Conventional adjuvants, such as alum and block copolymers, have not markedly increased the efficacy of DNA-based vaccines for HIV (176). However, a new adjuvant, IL-2/Ig, containing IL-2 fused to the heavy chain of immunoglobulin to increase the half-life of IL-2 activity, has been developed (21). When delivered either as a protein or as a genetic adjuvant in monkeys, IL-2/Ig enhanced DNA vaccine-elicited HIV-1 Env- and Gag-specific Ab and CTL responses (20).
Immunomodulators
One strategy that has been extensively applied to augment DNA
vaccine-elicited immune responses to a broad range of Ag including
hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, HIV-1, influenza virus,
Plasmodium, and
Leishmania is the coadministration of plasmids
encoding immunomodulator molecules such as cytokines, chemokines,
costimulatory molecules, and adhesion molecules. Coinoculation
of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (
207,
150),
IL-2 (
208), IL-12 (
96), and IL-15 (
18,
100,
209) along with
HIV DNA vaccines was shown to enhance the cellular immune responses
to HIV-1 Ags in mice. Intramuscular delivery of IL-12 cDNA significantly
increased the percentage of activated lymphocytes (expressing
Ly6, a T-cell activation marker) in a herpesvirus-infected mouse
model system (
178). The same group also demonstrated enhanced
cellular immune responses to herpes simplex virus gD DNA vaccine
on coadministration of IL-2, IL-12, IL-15, or IL-18 cytokines
(
179). IL-2 coinjections in nonhuman primate studies were shown
to modulate HIV Ag-specific immune responses (
102). Other studies
(
97,
98,
99,
101,
123,
210) have indicated an augmentation of
HIV-1-specific responses in mice after coimmunization with plasmids
expressing the costimulatory molecule B7-2, the adhesion molecules
ICAM-1 and LFA-3, and the chemokines RANTES, MIP-1

, and monocyte
chemotactic protein 1 along with HIV DNA vaccines. It is clear
from this brief discussion that there are many interesting options
for improving the potency of DNA vaccines.
Prime-Boost Strategies
The combination of vaccination modalities is now widely used
to enhance specific protective immune responses in nonhuman
primates. DNA-primed responses can be boosted with live recombinant
vectors or proteins in various prime-boost strategies. DNA priming
followed by Env IIIB protein boosting increased antibody responses
and successfully protected rhesus macaques against challenge
with the nonpathogenic SHIV-IIIB (
112); however, in a similar
study, cynomolgous monkeys boosted with protein following DNA
immunization were not protected against a nonpathogenic SHIV-Lai
challenge (
159). Protein boosting has not been able to generate
broadly reactive neutralizing-Ab responses or provide protection
against diverse pathogenic viruses, although it appears to augment
the neutralizing-Ab responses to T-cell-line-adapted nonpathogenic
viruses. The first finding of increased immunogenicity following
the consecutive use of DNA and an attenuated virus was with
mice when vectors carrying the HA gene of influenza virus were
used. The efficiency of priming with DNA followed by boosting
with a live vector is due to the DNA focusing the immune response
on the vaccine Ags. Since the DNA is nonimmunogenic itself,
immunity is elicited primarily to the encoded Ags. This is in
contrast to approaches such as the live vector system, where
immunity is elicited to both the vector and the vaccine Ag,
leading to an overall dilution of vaccine-elicited protective
immunity. The use of a live vector as the booster enhances the
DNA-primed immune response both by expressing larger amounts
of Ag and by stimulating a proinflammatory response that augments
immunity. Live-virus vectors that have the ability to infect
professional Ag-presenting DCs (
217) such as MVA (
6) or rAd5
(
8,
10,
176) are now used to boost DNA-primed responses against
HIV Ags with higher efficiency (
36).

CURRENT EXCITEMENT ABOUT DNA VACCINE STRATEGIES
Some DNA-based approaches have generated significant interest
due to their results, particularly in nonhuman primate models
of infection. Adjuvanted DNA vaccines (
20) and DNA-primed live-virus
vector-boosted vaccines (prime-boost) (
9,
176) designed to raise
high levels of CD8 T cells have been shown to control the viral
load following challenge in rhesus macaques from pathogenic
SHIV hybrids (
164). Most of these vaccines have used SIV Gag-Pol
and HIV-1 Env 89.6 or 89.6P as immunogens, and the animals were
challenged with the pathogenic SHIV 89.6P, which usually kills
the majority of nonvaccinated control animals within 6 months
(
94). Challenges have been performed between 6 weeks (
176) and
7 months (
7,
9,
10) after the final immunization and have been
administered by both intravenous (
20,
176) and intrarectal routes
(
9,
10). All of the vaccinated animals were infected but rapidly
controlled their plasma viral loads at or below the level of
detection (500 to 1,000 copies per ml of plasma) by 8 to 12
weeks. More than 80% of the control animals at close to 2 years
after the SHIV challenge lost their CD4 cells and succumbed
to AIDS, whereas a majority of the vaccinated animals maintained
their CD4 cells, controlled their levels of virus, and have
not yet progressed toward AIDS. Vaccinated animals registered
an early and rapid expansion of antiviral T cells and a delayed
appearance of neutralizing Abs, suggesting a crucial role for
CD8 T cells early in the viral control (
9,
20). However, a recent
follow-up study (
17) showed that there could be escape from
this protection. An additional 3-year study of macaques immunized
with DNA encoding SIV Gag and challenged with heterologous SIV
demonstrated waning immune responses and serial breakthroughs
in viral replication in study animals after an initial control
of the plasma viral load for 1 to 2 years (
18). These studies
collectively suggest that more work is needed for a DNA approach
alone or a DNA prime followed by a viral vector boost to completely
control the pathogenic challenge in these model systems. However,
these studies (
9,
20,
30) have clearly brought us closer to
the dream of a potent DNA vaccine approach to HIV-1.

DNA VACCINE CLINICAL STUDY
The first DNA vaccine to be tested in the clinic was for HIV-1
in the context of immune therapy (
125). Since that time, there
have been several clinical studies for both prophylaxis and
immune therapy of HIV. Structural genes for subtype B have been
tested, as have cocktails of the regulatory genes
tat,
rev,
and
nef, in immune therapy (
103). In addition, in the area of
prophylaxis, both structural genes (
126) and epitope-based approaches
(
79) have been tested. Importantly, these collective studies
involving several hundred persons are establishing that DNA
approaches appear very well tolerated in humans. No study has
reported a single significant adverse event. Of relevance is
that these vaccines have been immunogenic in humans to various
degrees. In the therapy situation, some evidence for increases
in cellular immunity have been reported (
103); however, effects
on viral load are still awaiting confirmation. In the prophylaxis
trial, Ab responses have been very low to nonexistent. CD4 T-cell
responses have been observed with reasonable frequency, but
overall the CD8 T-cell responses have not been as strong as
is probably necessary to effectively control the infection.
It is clear that the most important area of focus for the further
clinical development of this technology is to improve the immune
potency of the next generation of plasmid vaccines. In this
regard, there is much interest in testing newer prime-boost
studies, where DNA priming is followed by a live MVA vector
boost (
8) or a live adenovirus vector boost (
176,
213). Many
of these studies will include optimized DNA vectors. Preliminary
results from a phase I study that tested HIV-1
gag-specific
inmmune responses in uninfected humans immunized with nonadjuvanted
HIV-1
gag DNA vaccines or HIV-1
gag-expressing Ad5 were recently
announced. Both vaccines appear to be well tolerated by volunteers
and also are able to successfully elicit cross-clade anti-
gag responses. The Ad5 vaccine was more immunogenic than the DNA
vaccine at all doses tested since even at high doses of DNA
vaccine (5 mg) administered, anti-
gag immune responses were
observed in fewer than half of the individuals in the study
group even at week 30 following immunization. Recent studies
have shown consistent and strong CTL responses to
gag in macaques
immunized with DNA-CRL 1005-adjuvanted
gag plasmids and boosted
with rAd5 encoding
gag (
36). These studies do establish that
a significant percentage of humans respond to both the DNA and
adenovirus approaches, and more evaluation of more potent DNA
vaccines is clearly warranted. In this regard, novel approaches
testing the codelivery of gene adjuvants such as the IL-2/Ig
vectors (
20) along with the HIV Ag vectors, should be mentioned.
Additionally, there are plans to use more potent Th1 cytokine
adjuvants such as IL-12 or IL-15 for clinical evaluation (
96,
100). The goal for use of these new HIV vaccines should be to
drive greater CD8 T-cell responses in a broad segment of vaccine
recipients. It is hoped that ultimately the frequency of CD8
T-cell responses in vaccine recipients can break the 50% response
rate barrier and move closer to a more comfortable range around
80%. These exciting studies will closely be watched over the
next few years.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Multiple Epitopes
Approximately 200 T-cell epitopes specific for various genes
of HIV have been mapped in humans. The use of viral peptide
pools to enumerate antigen-specific CD4 and CD8 T-cell responses
in vitro regardless of the HLA type has helped to assess the
contribution of various HIV-1 proteins in disease control in
long-term nonprogressors (individuals who have controlled virus
replication and maintained plasma virus loads at 3,000 copies
or less per ml of plasma for several years). Gag, Nef, and Env
proteins were demonstrated through these studies to account
for the majority of the T-cell response. A recent study designed
to evaluate the requirement for Env in a DNA-rMVA vaccine revealed
that Gag-Pol-Env immunization was far superior in controlling
subsequent infection than was Gag-Pol immunization alone (
7).
Following Gag-Pol immunization, only 7 of 12 animals managed
to control the challenge infection, whereas following Gag-Pol-Env
immunization, 23 of 24 animals controlled virus replication,
suggesting a crucial role for Env. Another recent study (
142)
with a pathogenic macaque SIV challenge model used a multiplasmid
DNA vaccine consisting of Gag-Pol/Env-Rev to demonstrate a greater
protection from CD4 loss as well as lower viral loads in immunized
macaques as opposed to control animals. This study further highlights
the importance of including multiple Ags of HIV-1 in designing
DNA vaccines to enhance vaccine-conferred protection in a challenge
context (Fig.
4). Given the high diversity of HIV-1 isolates
and their frequent escape from immune control (
17), it would
be advantageous to include multiple HIV genes to elicit a broad
and a more universal immune response. Furthermore, the use of
"epitope string" approaches is also under investigation (
146).
Enhancing Memory Responses
The mechanisms of T-cell priming with DNA vaccination are not
well understood, whether by direct transfection, indirectly
through cross-presentation or both. Also, the types of effector
and memory T cells that are formed and the duration of Ag expression
following DNA vaccination are not known. The efficacy of vaccines
can be enhanced by selectively modulating a particular stage
of a T-cell response. For instance, increased levels of IL-4,
IL-7, or IL-15 in vivo can increase the numbers of Ag-specific
CD4 and CD8 T cells, and IL-15 can enhance protective immunity
(
179,
127,
212). Furthermore, IL-15 has been shown to increase
the proliferation of CD8 memory T cells without having a comparable
effect on CD4 cells (
215). Thus inclusion of IL-15 along with
the vaccine Ag in a DNA vaccine to specifically magnify CD8
memory is now being actively pursued in the design of several
HIV vaccines (Fig.
4). Whether coadministration of these cytokines
can have lasting effects on the generation or maintenance of
Ag-specific memory T cells needs to be investigated further.
It might be possible to increase the proliferation of effector
T-cell populations by modulating the factors that regulate Ag-independent
cell division. This would be particularly helpful in cases where
Ag distribution by a vaccine is limited or short-lived. Alternatively,
it might be possible to reduce effector cell death, thereby
increasing the number of memory T cells that are formed. In
CD154 (CD40L)-deficient mice, effector CD8 T-cell death is enhanced
and the mice display a nearly 10-fold reduction in Ag-specific
memory T cells after lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus infection.
Interestingly, however, the lack of CD154 has no effect on CD8
T-cell clonal expansion (
29,
202). Therefore, coadministration
of CD40L may enhance CD40-CD154 interactions and specifically
modulate the effector contraction phase (
180) (Fig.
4). Several
candidate approaches to enhance T-cell memory are currently
under trial and show promise. These strategies will, however,
be challenging because of a lack of understanding of the precise
signals and mechanisms that regulate the various stages of T-cell
differentiation.
Targeting DCs
DCs are the key professional APC needed to initiate a cellular
immune response by naive T cells. Fusion of Ag to CTLA-4, which
binds CD80/CD86 on APCs, directs the fusion Ag to the APCs.
This strategy was successfully employed to confer protection
in sheep rechallenged with
Corynebacterium pseudotropicali (
39)
and recently in enhancing Ab responses to an Ag derived from
Taenia ovis in mice (
53). The kinetics of the Ab response generated
following CTLA-4-targeted DNA vaccination was also significantly
greater than that achieved with nontargeted DNA vaccination
or with adjuvanted protein vaccination in this study (
53). The
application of CTLA-4 targeting of HIV DNA vaccines requires
further investigation. Strategies are being developed to expand
DCs in vivo with cytokines and other agents such as Flt-3 ligand.
A recent study (
27) demonstrated for the first time that mice
immunized with DNA encoding gp120 fused with proinflammatory
chemoattractants of immature DCs, such as ß-defensin
2, MCP-3/CCL7, or macrophage-derived chemokine (MDC/CCL22),
elicited high titers of both neutralizing and nonneutralizing
anti-Env antibodies. Immune sera inhibited HIV-1 Env-mediated
cell fusion and infection by pseudotype virus expressing the
same Env as well as infection by pseudotype viruses expressing
various other Env proteins (89.6;R5X4, NL4-3;R5, and JRFL;R5),
despite different coreceptor usage. Responses required the physical
linkage of gp120 with the chemokine, since there was a lack
of immune response following immunization of mice with DNA encoding
a free mixture of chemokine and gp120; this result is in contrast
to an earlier study that reported an adjuvant effect of the
chemokine moiety in the absence of physical linkage with the
Ag (
100). Although the DNA vaccine in this study was delivered
into skin by gene gun immunization, significant CD8 CTL activity
was detected in both the spleen and Peyer's patches, suggesting
induction of both systemic and mucosal immune responses. In
addition to targeting gp120 to chemokine receptors on professional
APCs, it has been proposed that chemokine or defensin fusion
proteins may stimulate surface expression of costimulatory molecules
and synthesis of proinflammatory cytokines by subsets of immature
DCs in vivo. Additionally, chemokines could differentially attract
Th1 or Th2 cells, thus modulating immunity. An understanding
of the mechanism of immunity elicited by these gp120-chemokine
or gp-120 defensin fusion proteins is required. Another strategy
under consideration to enhance APC function is to administer
HIV DNA-based vaccines with IL-12 as a genetic adjuvant (
96)
and use an appropriate recombinant live vector as the booster.
Additionally, coadministration of appropriate costimulatory
molecules could enhance and sustain CTL responses (
97).
Newer Plasmid Delivery Systems
The recombinant VSV (rVSV), a minus-strand RNA virus, is undergoing
substantial modification to increase its utility as a vaccine
vector. rVSVs were shown to elicit a high level of primary CD8
responses to HIV Ags when used as vaccine vectors (
75) and could
also protect rhesus macaques from a pathogenic SHIV infection
(
167). rVSVs in which different serotypes of VSV-G are exchanged
for the standard Indiana serotype G (glycoprotein exchange vectors)
have now been developed to eliminate neutralization of the VSV
vector when used as boosters (
76). Gag-specific CTL responses
were increased on immunization with plasmids encoding HIV-1
Gag particles pseudotyped with VSV-G (
76). Following an in vitro
observation that uptake of HIV-1 virions bearing either HIV-1
or VSV-G could result in presentation of HIV-1 Gag epitopes
on MHC class I molecules in the absence of viral protein synthesis
in primary human DCs and macrophages (exogenous presentation
by cross-priming) (
32), VSV-G envelope pseudotyped Gag particles
were developed and used as DNA vaccines to increase Ag uptake
after DNA-based immunization by taking advantage of the fusogenic
activity and receptor-mediated entry into cells in vivo. Such
VSV-G-pseudotyped Gag particles entered both the MHC class I
and II processing pathways. In contrast, naked Gag particles
entered only the MHC class II processing pathway. Hence, one
could combine DNA-based immunization and nonreplicating pseudotyped
virus when designing vaccines to deliver HIV-1 Ag to the immune
system in vivo. Additionally, one could potentially enhance
the primary responses elicited by VSV-G pseudotyped HIV-1 DNA
vaccines by using the modified VSV-G booster that is resistant
to neutralization. Gag-LAMP-1 fusion proteins have been administered
intramuscularly as DNA vaccines in mice in a recent study (
128).
Unmodified Gag was shown to be highly expressed as a Gag-LAMP-1
fusion protein in immunized animals, and the vaccine was able
to stimulate Gag-specific CD4 helper responses by being targeted
to the endosomal MHC class II pathway of processing and Ag presentation.
Another recent study demonstrated that boosting the Gag-encoding
DNA plasmid with Gag protein adsorbed to polylactide coglycolide
particles (PLG) enhanced the immunogenicity of the priming vaccine
as well as eliciting broad and sustained CTL CD4 helper responses
and anti-Gag Ab responses in rhesus macaques (
151). This synergy
with Gag DNA priming and Gag-PLG boosting provides yet another
strategy to elicit protective immune responses while circumventing
the need for a live vector boost. Further optimization of these
strategies in nonhuman primate models is eagerly awaited and
will open up exciting possibilities for the development of strategies
for producing HIV-1 DNA vaccines for humans.
Novel Adjuvants
The influence of adjuvants on the dynamics and durability of
T-cell responses to candidate HIV vaccines was assessed in a
recent study (
37). Codon-optimized sequences from the HIV
gag gene were inserted into DNA vaccine vectors in a manner so as
to express the coding sequence with or without the tissue plasminogen
activator leader sequence. The vaccines were delivered as plasmid
DNA without adjuvant or as plasmid DNA formulated with a novel
block copolymer adjuvant (CRL8623). This study reported a persistent
cell-mediated immune response in rhesus macaques for at least
18 months following a four-dose vaccination regimen. Both CRL8623
adjuvanted and nonadjuvanted plasmid vaccines were immunogenic;
however, the adjuvanted formulation elicited enhanced T-cell
responses, with a bias toward more Ag-specific CD8 T cells.
This approach has now been moved to clinical evaluation. A more
recent study (
15) with mice demonstrated a higher level of Ab
and CTL responses to HIV-1 gp120 when the plasmid was administered
along with the catalytic domain of the cholera toxin as an adjuvant
than that obtained when the gp120 plasmid was administered alone.
Concomitant with the development of conformationally constrained
envelope immunogens (see below), the development of such novel
adjuvants provide a means of enhancing and sustaining immune
responses elicited against these plasmid immunogens.
Structured Envelope Vaccines
Since envelope glycoproteins exist as oligomers on the native
virus, attempts are being made to develop a variety of stable
oligomeric envelope proteins for evaluation as immunogens (
64).
The HIV-1 envelope undergoes a series of conformational changes
during the process of viral fusion to the cell membrane (
107),
and attempts are being made to develop subunit immunogens that
mimic the fusion intermediate forms of the envelope (Fig.
2).
Elegant mutagenic and crystal structure studies of the HIV-1
envelope gp120 are increasing our understanding of the range
of confirmations available to these glycoproteins and have also
demonstrated that designing mutated envelopes with restricted
conformational flexibility may be one way to achieve an efficient
response to these immunogens (
137,
206).
Plasmid expression vectors can be easily modified to express these various forms of HIV envelope proteins, allowing a rapid assessment of these vaccine candidates. Some innovative studies with mice have used mutated envelopes as plasmid immunogens to elicit both neutralizing-antibody responses to the envelope as well as CTL responses to the immunogen (38). This is clearly an important and an exciting area. If a structural immunogen is developed that does induce cross-reactive neutralizing responses, its inclusion in current DNA approaches should be evaluated.
Contending with Diversity and Enhancing Cross-Clade Protection
While most current HIV vaccines have shown the ability to control
homologous challenges, their ability to control a heterologous
challenge is yet to be demonstrated. Based on the data available
from the Los Alamos database for known T-cell epitopes, perfect
conservation varies from 88% for the least variable protein
(p24) to 46% for the most variable protein (gp120) (
24) within
clade B. This level of variation poses a potential problem for
these vaccines even as they progress through human efficacy
trials. Currently, candidate gp120 subunit vaccines derived
from isolates (
164) are now in phase III efficacy trials (
49),
and it is hoped that they will be sufficiently cross-reactive
to protect against circulating viruses. Given that HIV-1 envelope
proteins can differ in more than 30% of their amino acids, this
may be exceedingly optimistic. One way to overcome the problem
of strain variability would be to use vaccines that represent
several different subtypes. This approach that is now under
active development (
70,
73).
Epitope enhancement via generation of a chimeric peptide sequence between different strains of the virus can be yet another strategy to elicit more broadly cross-reactive T cells. This strategy was effectively applied in the generation of a broadly cross-reactive CTL that recognized multiple strains of HIV for a CTL epitope from a variable segment of the HIV envelope protein, by substituting one T-cell receptor-interacting residue from one strain with that from another (185). Furthermore, such cross-reactive components of the repertoire can be preferentially induced by an appropriate manipulation of the amino acid sequence of the epitope, thus allowing a better representation of all possible clones in the repertoire that may otherwise be dominated by type-specific clones (Fig. 4). Finally, since an effective HIV vaccine must elicit Abs that bind to neutralizing determinants from a variety of HIV envelopes, it has been suggested that polyvalent envelopes should be assessed as potential immunogens.
Expression of several MHC class I alleles has been demonstrated to confer a protective effect against disease progression in both HIV-1 and SIV infection. A very recent study (216) with a SHIV-macaque model indicated a significant attenuation of disease progression in Mamu-A(*)01-positive rhesus monkeys infected with the highly pathogenic SHIV 89.6P. This correlated with a Mamu-A(*)01-restricted dominant CTL response, a lower viral load in lymph nodes, and preservation of lymph node structure during early infection. In contrast, Mamu-A(*)01-negative monkeys exhibited massive destruction of lymphoid tissue and rapid disease progression. These findings additionally support the requirement for an effective AIDS vaccine to elicit CTL responses that protect lymphoid tissue from HIV-mediated destruction early after infection and show that appropriate vaccine studies should be designed to segregate rather than concentrate MHC genotypes in order to prevent study bias. However, replication of this study by other laboratories will be important to generalize this study.

CONCLUSIONS
With accumulating evidence for the importance of CTLs in containing
HIV spread in infected individuals, a number of vaccine strategies
are being pursued for the elicitation of these immune effector
cells. DNA-based strategies, in particular, have shown great
promise and potential for further development as HIV vaccines.
The new vectors and vaccination modalities including DNA-rMVA,
DNA-rAd5, DNA/IL-2/Ig, and DNA with other cytokines are currently
entering phase I clinical trials. These vaccination modalities
have been chosen for their ability to raise reasonable titers
of immune responses in animal models and for their impact on
protection outcomes in nonhuman primate models. There is a growing
conviction now that vaccine modalities such as DNA-based immunization
will result in control and slower disease progression, if not
clean prevention of infection. The simplest approach to plasmid
vaccination originally reported over 10 years (
165,
186,
192,
198) ago has grown in scope and in complexity of design. The
current generation of DNA vaccines includes many very exciting
ones that have captured the scientific imagination. As we move
forward through the next decade of advances, we can hope that
the 20-year review will see the description of many phase III
studies of DNA-based approaches to HIV prophylaxis with, hopefully,
at least some significant efficacy.

FOOTNOTES
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104. Phone: (215) 349-8365. Fax: (215) 573-9436. E-mail:
dbweiner{at}mail.med.upenn.edu.


REFERENCES
1 - Agadjanyan, M. G., J. J. Kim, N. Trivedi, D. M. Wilson, B. Monzavi-Karbassi, L. D. Morrison, L. K. Nottingham, T. Dentchev, A. Tsai, K. Dang, A. A. Chalian, M. A. Maldonado, W. V. Williams, and D. B. Weiner. 1999. CD86 (B7-2) can function to drive MHC-restricted antigen-specific CTL responses in vivo. J. Immunol. 162:3417-3427.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2 - Aihara, H., and J. Miyazaki. 1998. Gene transfer into muscle by electroporation in vivo. Nat. Biotechnol. 16:867-870.[CrossRef][Medline]
3 - Akbari, O., N. Panjwani, S. Garcia, R. Tascon, D. Lowrie, and B. Stockinger. 1999. DNA vaccination: transfection and activation of dendritic cells as key events for immunity. J. Exp. Med. 189:169-178.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4 - Albert, M. L., S. F. Pearce, L. M. Francisco, B. Sauter, P. Roy, R. L. Silverstein, and N. Bhardwaj. 1998. Immature dendritic cells phagocytose apoptotic cells via alphavbeta5 and CD36, and cross-present antigens to cytotoxic T lymphocytes. J. Exp. Med. 188:1359-1368.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5 - Albert, M. L., B. Sauter, and N. Bhardwaj. 1998. Dendritic cells acquire antigen from apoptotic cells and induce class I-restricted CTLs. Nature 392:86-89.[CrossRef][Medline]
6 - Allen, T. M., T. U. Vogel, D. H. Fuller, B. R. Mothe, S. Steffen, J. E. Boyson, T. Shipley, J. Fuller, T. Hanke, A. Sette, J. D. Altman, B. Moss, A. J. McMichael, and D. I. Watkins. 2000. Induction of AIDS virus-specific CTL activity in fresh, unstimulated peripheral blood lymphocytes from rhesus macaques vaccinated with a DNA prime/modified vaccinia virus Ankara boost regimen. J. Immunol. 164:4968-4978.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7 - Amara, R. R., J. M. Smith, S. I. Staprans, D. C. Montefiori, F. Villinger, J. D. Altman, S. P. O'Neil, N. L. Kozyr, Y. Xu, L. S. Wyatt, P. L. Earl, J. G. Herndon, J. M. McNicholl, H. M. McClure, B. Moss, and H. L. Robinson. 2002. Critical role for Env as well as Gag-Pol in control of a simian-human immunodeficiency virus 89.6P challenge by a DNA prime/recombinant modified vaccinia virus Ankara vaccine. J. Virol. 76:6138-6146.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8 - Amara, R. R., F. Villinger, J. D. Altman, S. L. Lydy, S. P. O'Neil, S. I. Staprans, D. C. Montefiori, Y. Xu, J. G. Herndon, L. S. Wyatt, M. A. Candido, N. L. Kozyr, P. L. Earl, J. M. Smith, H. L. Ma, B. D. Grimm, M. L. Hulsey, H. M. McClure, J. M. McNicholl, B. Moss, and H. L. Robinson. 2002. Control of a mucosal challenge and prevention of AIDS by a multiprotein DNA/MVA vaccine. Vaccine 20:1949-1955.[CrossRef][Medline]
9 - Amara, R. R., F. Villinger, J. D. Altman, S. L. Lydy, S. P. O'Neil, S. I. Staprans, D. C. Montefiori, Y. Xu, J. G. Herndon, L. S. Wyatt, M. A. Candido, N. L. Kozyr, P. L. Earl, J. M. Smith, H. L. Ma, B. D. Grimm, M. L. Hulsey, J. Miller, H. M. McClure, J. M. McNicholl, B. Moss, and H. L. Robinson. 2001. Control of a mucosal challenge and prevention of AIDS by a multiprotein DNA/MVA vaccine. Science 292:69-74.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10 - Amara, R. R., F. Villinger, S. I. Staprans, J. D. Altman, D. C. Montefiori, N. L. Kozyr, Y. Xu, L. S. Wyatt, P. L. Earl, J. G. Herndon, H. M. McClure, B. Moss, and H. L. Robinson. 2002. Different patterns of immune responses but similar control of a simian-human immunodeficiency virus 89.6P mucosal challenge by modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) and DNA/MVA vaccines. J. Virol. 76:7625-7631.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11 - Andino, R., D. Silvera, S. D. Suggett, P. L. Achacoso, C. J. Miller, D. Baltimore, and M. B. Feinberg. 1994. Engineering poliovirus as a vaccine vector for the expression of diverse antigens. Science 265:1448-1451.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12 - Baba, T. W., Y. S. Jeong, D. Pennick, R. Bronson, M. F. Greene, and R. M. Ruprecht. 1995. Pathogenicity of live, attenuated SIV after mucosal infection of neonatal macaques. Science 267:1820-1825.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13 - Babiuk, S., M. E. Baca-Estrada, M. Foldvari, M. Storms, D. Rabussay, G. Widera, and L. A. Babiuk. 2002. Electroporation improves the efficacy of DNA vaccines in large animals. Vaccine 20:3399-3408.[CrossRef][Medline]
14 - Bagarazzi, M. L., J. D. Boyer, K. E. Ugen, M. A. Javadian, M. Chattergoon, A. Shah, M. Bennett, R. Ciccarelli, R. Carrano, L. Coney, and D. B. Weiner. 1998. Safety and immunogenicity of HIV-1 DNA constructs in chimpanzees. Vaccine 16:1836-1841.[CrossRef][Medline]
15 - Bagley, K. C., M. T. Shata, D. Y. Onyabe, A. L. DeVico, T. R. Fouts, G. K. Lewis, and D. M. Hone. 2003. Immunogenicity of DNA vaccines that direct the coincident expression of the 120 kDa glycoprotein of human immunodeficiency virus and the catalytic domain of cholera toxin. Vaccine 21:3335-3341.[CrossRef][Medline]
16 - Banchereau, J., and R. M. Steinman. 1998. Dendritic cells and the control of immunity. Nature 392:245-252.[CrossRef][Medline]
17 - Barouch, D. H., J. Kunstman, M. J. Kuroda, J. E. Schmitz, S. Santra, F. W. Peyerl, G. R. Krivulka, K. Beaudry, M. A. Lifton, D. A. Gorgone, D. C. Montefiori, M. G. Lewis, S. M. Wolinsky, and N. L. Letvin. 2002. Eventual AIDS vaccine failure in a rhesus monkey by viral escape from cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Nature 415:335-339.[CrossRef][Medline]
18 - Barouch, D. H., P. F. McKay, S. M. Sumida, S. Santra, S. S. Jackson, D. A. Gorgone, M. A. Lifton, B. K. Chakrabarti, L. Xu, G. J. Nabel, and N. L. Letvin. 2003. Plasmid chemokines and colony-stimulating factors enhance the immunogenicity of DNA priming-viral vector boosting human immunodeficiency virus type 1 vaccines. J. Virol. 77:8729-8735.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
19 - Barouch, D. H., S. Santra, M. J. Kuroda, J. E. Schmitz, R. Plishka, A. Buckler-White, A. E. Gaitan, R. Zin, J. H. Nam, L. S. Wyatt, M. A. Lifton, C. E. Nickerson, B. Moss, D. C. Montefiori, V. M. Hirsch, and N. L. Letvin. 2001. Reduction of simian-human immunodeficiency virus 89.6P viremia in rhesus monkeys by recombinant modified vaccinia virus Ankara vaccination. J. Virol. 75:5151-5158.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
20 - Barouch, D. H., S. Santra, J. E. Schmitz, M. J. Kuroda, T. M. Fu, W. Wagner, M. Bilska, A. Craiu, X. X. Zheng, G. R. Krivulka, K. Beaudry, M. A. Lifton, C. E. Nickerson, W. L. Trigona, K. Punt, D. C. Freed, L. Guan, S. Dubey, D. Casimiro, A. Simon, M. E. Davies, M. Chastain, T. B. Strom, R. S. Gelman, D. C. Montefiori, M. G. Lewis, E. A. Emini, J. W. Shiver, and N. L. Letvin. 2000. Control of viremia and prevention of clinical AIDS in rhesus monkeys by cytokine-augmented DNA vaccination. Science 290:486-492.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21 - Barouch, D. H., S. Santra, T. D. Steenbeke, X. X. Zheng, H. C. Perry, M. E. Davies, D. C. Freed, A. Craiu, T. B. Strom, J. W. Shiver, and N. L. Letvin. 1998. Augmentation and suppression of immune responses to an HIV-1 DNA vaccine by plasmid cytokine/Ig administration. J. Immunol. 161:1875-1882.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22 - Barré-Sinoussi, F., J. C. Chermann, F. Rey, M. T. Nugeyre, S. Chamaret, J. Gruest, C. Dauguet, C. Axler-Blin, F. Vezinet-Brun, C. Rouzioux, W. Rozenbaum, and L. Montagnier. 1983. Isolation of a T-lymphotropic retrovirus from a patient at risk for acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Science 220:868-871.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23 - Belehradek, M., C. Domenge, B. Luboinski, S. Orlowski, J. Belehradek, Jr., and L. M. Mir. 1993. Electrochemotherapy, a new antitumor treatment. First clinical phase I-II trial. Cancer 72:3694-3700.[CrossRef][Medline]
24 - Berman, P. W., A. M. Gray, T. Wrin, J. C. Vennari, D. J. Eastman, G. R. Nakamura, D. P. Francis, G. Gorse, and D. H. Schwartz. 1997. Genetic and immunologic characterization of viruses infecting MN-rgp120-vaccinated volunteers. J. Infect. Dis. 176:384-397.[Medline]
25 - Berman, P. W., T. J. Gregory, L. Riddle, G. R. Nakamura, M. A. Champe, J. P. Porter, F. M. Wurm, R. D. Hershberg, E. K. Cobb, and J. W. Eichberg. 1990. Protection of chimpanzees from infection by HIV-1 after vaccination with recombinant glycoprotein gp120 but not gp160. Nature 345:622-625.[CrossRef][Medline]
26 - Bevan, M. J. 1976. Minor H antigens introduced on H-2 different stimulating cells cross-react at the cytotoxic T cell level during in vivo priming. J. Immunol. 117:2233-2238.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
27 - Biragyn, A., I. M. Belyakov, Y. H. Chow, D. S. Dimitrov, J. A. Berzofsky, and L. W. Kwak. 2002. DNA vaccines encoding human immunodeficiency virus-1 glycoprotein 120 fusions with proinflammatory chemoattractants induce systemic and mucosal immune responses. Blood 100:1153-1159.
28 - Boczkowski, D., S. K. Nair, D. Snyder, and E. Gilboa. 1996. Dendritic cells pulsed with RNA are potent antigen-presenting cells in vitro and in vivo. J. Exp. Med. 184:465-472.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29 - Borrow, P., A. Tishon, S. Lee, J. Xu, I. S. Grewal, M. B. Oldstone, and R. A. Flavell. 1996. CD40L-deficient mice show deficits in antiviral immunity and have an impaired memory CD8+ CTL response. J. Exp. Med. 183:2129-2142.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
30 - Boyer, J. D., K. E. Ugen, B. Wang, M. Agadjanyan, L. Gilbert, M. L. Bagarazzi, M. Chattergoon, P. Frost, A. Javadian, W. V. Williams, Y. Refaeli, R. B. Ciccarelli, D. McCallus, L. Coney, and D. B. Weiner. 1997. Protection of chimpanzees from high-dose heterologous HIV-1 challenge by DNA vaccination. Nat. Med. 3:526-532.[CrossRef][Medline]
31 - Boyle, J. S., A. Silva, J. L. Brady, and A. M. Lew. 1997. DNA immunization: induction of higher avidity antibody and effect of route on T cell cytotoxicity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:14626-14631.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
32 - Buseyne, F., S. Le Gall, C. Boccaccio, J. P. Abastado, J. D. Lifson, L. O. Arthur, Y. Riviere, J. M. Heard, and O. Schwartz. 2001. MHC-I-restricted presentation of HIV-1 virion antigens without viral replication. Nat. Med. 7:344-349.[CrossRef][Medline]
33 - Calarota, S., G. Bratt, S. Nordlund, J. Hinkula, A. C. Leandersson, E. Sandstrom, and B. Wahren. 1998. Cellular cytotoxic response induced by DNA vaccination in HIV-1-infected patients. Lancet 351:1320-1325.[CrossRef][Medline]
34 - Casares, S., C. A. Bona, and T. D. Brumeanu. 1997. Engineering and characterization of a murine MHC class II-immunoglobulin chimera expressing an immunodominant CD4 T viral epitope. Protein Eng. 10:1295-1301.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
35 - Casares, S., K. Inaba, T. D. Brumeanu, R. M. Steinman, and C. A. Bona. 1997. Antigen presentation by dendritic cells after immunization with DNA encoding a major histocompatibility complex class II-restricted viral epitope. J. Exp. Med. 186:1481-1486.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
36 - Casimiro, D. R., L. Chen, T. M. Fu, R. K. Evans, M. J. Caulfield, M. E. Davies, A. Tang, M. Chen, L. Huang, V. Harris, D. C. Freed, K. A. Wilson, S. Dubey, D. M. Zhu, D. Nawrocki, H. Mach, R. Troutman, L. Isopi, D. Williams, W. Hurni, Z. Xu, J. G. Smith, S. Wang, X. Liu, L. Guan, R. Long, W. Trigona, G. J. Heidecker, H. C. Perry, N. Persaud, T. J. Toner, Q. Su, X. Liang, R. Youil, M. Chastain, A. J. Bett, D. B. Volkin, E. A. Emini, and J. W. Shiver. 2003. Comparative immunogenicity in rhesus monkeys of DNA plasmid, recombinant vaccinia virus, and replication-defective adenovirus vectors expressing a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 gag gene. J. Virol. 77:6305-6513.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
37 - Caulfield, M. J., S. Wang, J. G. Smith, T. W. Tobery, X. Liu, M. E. Davies, D. R. Casimiro, T. M. Fu, A. Simon, R. K. Evans, E. A. Emini, and J. Shiver. 2002. Sustained peptide-specific gamma interferon T-cell response in rhesus macaques immunized with human immunodeficiency virus gag DNA vaccines. J. Virol. 76:10038-10043.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
38 - Chakrabarti, B. K., W. P. Kong, B. Y. Wu, Z. Y. Yang, J. Friborg, X. Ling, S. R. King, D. C. Montefiori, and G. J. Nabel. 2002. Modifications of the human immunodeficiency virus envelope glycoprotein enhance immunogenicity for genetic immunization. J. Virol. 76:5357-5368.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
39 - Chaplin, P. J., R. De Rose, J. S. Boyle, P. McWaters, J. Kelly, J. M. Tennent, A. M. Lew, and J. P. Scheerlinck. 1999. Targeting improves the efficacy of a DNA vaccine against Corynebacterium pseudotuberculosis in sheep. Infect. Immun. 67:6434-6438.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
40 - Chattergoon, M., J. Boyer, and D. B. Weiner. 1997. Genetic immunization: a new era in vaccines and immune therapeutics. FASEB J. 11:753-763.[Abstract]
41 - Chattergoon, M. A., J. J. Kim, J. S. Yang, T. M. Robinson, D. J. Lee, T. Dentchev, D. M. Wilson, V. Ayyavoo, and D. B. Weiner. 2000. Targeted antigen delivery to antigen-presenting cells including dendritic cells by engineered Fas-mediated apoptosis. Nat. Biotechnol. 18:974-979.[CrossRef][Medline]
42 - Chattergoon, M. A., T. M. Robinson, J. D. Boyer, and D. B. Weiner. 1998. Specific immune induction following DNA-based immunization through in vivo transfection and activation of macrophages/antigen-presenting cells. J. Immunol. 160:5707-5718.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
43 - Chen, Z., T. Moyana, A. Saxena, R. Warrington, Z. Jia, and J. Xiang. 2001. Efficient antitumor immunity derived from maturation of dendritic cells that had phagocytosed apoptotic/necrotic tumor cells. Int. J. Cancer 93:539-548.[CrossRef][Medline]
44 - Cohen, A. D., J. D. Boyer, and D. B. Weiner. 1998. Modulating the immune response to genetic immunization. FASEB J. 12:1611-1626.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
45 - Condon, C., S. C. Watkins, C. M. Celluzzi, K. Thompson, and L. D. Falo, Jr. 1996. DNA-based immunization by in vivo transfection of dendritic cells. Nat. Med. 2:1122-1128.[CrossRef][Medline]
46 - Conry, R. M., A. F. LoBuglio, and D. T. Curiel. 1996. Polynucleotide-mediated immunization therapy of cancer. Semin. Oncol. 23:135-147.[Medline]
47 - Conry, R. M., A. F. LoBuglio, M. Wright, L. Sumerel, M. J. Pike, F. Johanning, R. Benjamin, D. Lu, and D. T. Curiel. 1995. Characterization of a messenger RNA polynucleotide vaccine vector. Cancer Res. 55:1397-1400.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
48 - Corr, M., A. von Damm, D. J. Lee, and H. Tighe. 1999. In vivo priming by DNA injection occurs predominantly by antigen transfer. J. Immunol. 163:4721-4727.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
49 - Cunningham, C. K., D. W. Wara, M. Kang, T. Fenton, E. Hawkins, J. McNamara, L. Mofenson, A. M. Duliege, D. Francis, E. J. McFarland, and W. Borkowsky. 2001. Safety of 2 recombinant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) envelope vaccines in neonates born to HIV-1-infected women. Clin. Infect. Dis. 32:801-807.[CrossRef][Medline]
50 - Daniel, M. D., F. Kirchhoff, S. C. Czajak, P. K. Sehgal, and R. C. Desrosiers. 1992. Protective effects of a live attenuated SIV vaccine with a deletion in the nef gene. Science 258:1938-1941.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
51 - Davis, H. L., R. G. Whalen, and B. A. Demeneix. 1993. Direct gene transfer into skeletal muscle in vivo: factors affecting efficiency of transfer and stability of expression. Hum. Gene Ther. 4:151-159.[Medline]
52 - Davis, N. L., I. J. Caley, K. W. Brown, M. R. Betts, D. M. Irlbeck, K. M. McGrath, M. J. Connell, D. C. Montefiori, J. A. Frelinger, R. Swanstrom, P. R. Johnson, and R. E. Johnston. 2000. Vaccination of macaques against pathogenic simian immunodeficiency virus with Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus replicon particles. J. Virol. 74:371-378.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
53 - Deliyannis, G., J. S. Boyle, J. L. Brady, L. E. Brown, and A. M. Lew. 2000. A fusion DNA vaccine that targets antigen-presenting cells increases protection from viral challenge. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:6676-6680.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
54 - Donnelly, J. J., J. B. Ulmer, J. W. Shiver, and M. A. Liu. 1997. DNA vaccines. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 15:617-648.[CrossRef][Medline]
55 - Eisenbraun, M. D., D. H. Fuller, and J. R. Haynes. 1993. Examination of parameters affecting the elicitation of humoral immune responses by particle bombardment-mediated genetic immunization. DNA Cell Biol. 12:791-797.[Medline]
56 - Etchart, N., R. Buckland, M. A. Liu, T. F. Wild, and D. Kaiserlian. 1997. Class I-restricted CTL induction by mucosal immunization with naked DNA encoding measles virus haemagglutinin. J. Gen. Virol. 78:1577-1580.[Abstract]
57 - Evans, D. T., D. H. O'Connor, P. Jing, J. L. Dzuris, J. Sidney, J. da Silva, T. M. Allen, H. Horton, J. E. Venham, R. A. Rudersdorf, T. Vogel, C. D. Pauza, R. E. Bontrop, R. DeMars, A. Sette, A. L. Hughes, and D. I. Watkins. 1999. Virus-specific cytotoxic T-lymphocyte responses select for amino-acid variation in simian immunodeficiency virus Env and Nef. Nat. Med. 5:1270-1276.[CrossRef][Medline]
58 - Evans, T. G., M. C. Keefer, K. J. Weinhold, M. Wolff, D. Montefiori, G. J. Gorse, B. S. Graham, M. J. McElrath, M. L. Clements-Mann, M. J. Mulligan, P. Fast, M. C. Walker, J. L. Excler, A. M. Duliege, and J. Tartaglia. 1999. A canarypox vaccine expressing multiple human immunodeficiency virus type 1 genes given alone or with rgp 120 elicits broad and durable CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses in seronegative volunteers. J. Infect. Dis. 180:290-298.[CrossRef][Medline]
59 - Falo, L. D., Jr., M. Kovacsovics-Bankowski, K. Thompson, and K. L. Rock. 1995. Targeting antigen into the phagocytic pathway in vivo induces protective tumour immunity. Nat. Med. 1:649-653.[CrossRef][Medline]
60 - Fan, H., Q. Lin, G. R. Morrissey, and P. A. Khavari. 1999. Immunization via hair follicles by topical application of naked DNA to normal skin. Nat. Biotechnol. 17:870-872.[CrossRef][Medline]
61 - Farina, S. F., G. P. Gao, Z. Q. Xiang, J. J. Rux, R. M. Burnett, M. R. Alvira, J. Marsh, H. C. Ertl, and J. M. Wilson. 2001. Replication-defective vector based on a chimpanzee adenovirus. J. Virol. 75:11603-11613.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
62 - Feinberg, M. B., and J. P. Moore. 2002. AIDS vaccine models: challenging challenge viruses. Nat. Med. 8:207-210.[CrossRef][Medline]
63 - Finzi, D., and R. F. Siliciano. 1998. Viral dynamics in HIV-1 infection. Cell 93:665-671.[CrossRef][Medline]
64 - Fouts, T., K. Godfrey, K. Bobb, D. Montefiori, C. V. Hanson, V. S. Kalyanaraman, A. DeVico, and R. Pal. 2002. Crosslinked HIV-1 envelope-CD4 receptor complexes elicit broadly cross-reactive neutralizing antibodies in rhesus macaques. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99:11842-11847.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
65 - Frankel, F. R., S. Hegde, J. Lieberman, and Y. Paterson. 1995. Induction of cell-mediated immune responses to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 Gag protein by using Listeria monocytogenes as a live vaccine vector. J. Immunol. 155:4775-47782.[Abstract]
66 - Fu, T. M., J. B. Ulmer, M. J. Caulfield, R. R. Deck, A. Friedman, S. Wang, X. Liu, J. J. Donnelly, and M. A. Liu. 1997. Priming of cytotoxic T lymphocytes by DNA vaccines: requirement for professional antigen presenting cells and evidence for antigen transfer from myocytes. Mol. Med. 3:362-371.[Medline]
67 - Fuller, D. H., and J. R. Haynes. 1994. A qualitative progression in HIV type 1 glycoprotein 120-specific cytotoxic cellular and humoral immune responses in mice receiving a DNA-based glycoprotein 120 vaccine. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses 10:1433-1441.[Medline]
68 - Fynan, E. F., R. G. Webster, D. H. Fuller, J. R. Haynes, J. C. Santoro, and H. L. Robinson. 1993. DNA vaccines: protective immunizations by parenteral, mucosal, and gene-gun inoculations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90:11478-11482.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
69 - Garzino-Demo, A., A. L. DeVico, F. Cocchi, and R. C. Gallo. 1998. Beta-chemokines and protection from HIV type 1 disease. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses 14(Suppl. 2):S177-S184.
70 - Gaschen, B., J. Taylor, K. Yusim, B. Foley, F. Gao, D. Lang, V. Novitsky, B. Haynes, B. H. Hahn, T. Bhattacharya, and B. Korber. 2002. Diversity considerations in HIV-1 vaccine selection. Science 296:2354-2360.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
71 - Georges-Courbot, M. C., C. Y. Lu, M. Makuwa, P. Telfer, R. Onanga, G. Dubreuil, Z. Chen, S. M. Smith, A. Georges, F. Gao, B. H. Hahn, and P. A. Marx. 1998. Natural infection of a household pet red-capped mangabey (Cercocebus torquatus torquatus) with a new simian immunodeficiency virus. J. Virol. 72:600-608.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
72 - Gilboa, E., S. K. Nair, and H. K. Lyerly. 1998. Immunotherapy of cancer with dendritic-cell-based vaccines. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 46:82-87.[CrossRef][Medline]
73 - Goulder, P. J., C. Brander, Y. Tang, C. Tremblay, R. A. Colbert, M. M. Addo, E. S. Rosenberg, T. Nguyen, R. Allen, A. Trocha, M. Altfeld, S. He, M. Bunce, R. Funkhouser, S. I. Pelton, S. K. Burchett, K. McIntosh, B. T. Korber, and B. D. Walker. 2001. Evolution and transmission of stable CTL escape mutations in HIV infection. Nature 412:334-338.[CrossRef][Medline]
74 - Goulder, P. J., S. L. Rowland-Jones, A. J. McMichael, and B. D. Walker. 1999. Anti-HIV cellular immunity: recent advances towards vaccine design. AIDS 13(Suppl. A):S121-S136.
75 - Haglund, K., I. Leiner, K. Kerksiek, L. Buonocore, E. Pamer, and J. K. Rose. 2002. High-level primary CD8+ T-cell response to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 gag and env generated by vaccination with recombinant vesicular stomatitis viruses. J. Virol. 76:2730-2738.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
76 - Haglund, K., I. Leiner, K. Kerksiek, L. Buonocore, E. Pamer, and J. K. Rose. 2002. Robust recall and long-term memory T-cell responses induced by prime-boost regimens with heterologous live viral vectors expressing human immunodeficiency virus type 1 Gag and Env proteins. J. Virol. 76:7506-7517.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
77 - Haigwood, N. L., C. C. Pierce, M. N. Robertson, A. J. Watson, D. C. Montefiori, M. Rabin, J. B. Lynch, L. Kuller, J. Thompson, W. R. Morton, R. E. Benveniste, S. L. Hu, P. Greenberg, and S. P. Mossman. 1999. Protection from pathogenic SIV challenge using multigenic DNA vaccines. Immunol. Lett. 66:183-188.[CrossRef][Medline]
78 - Hamajima, K., S. Sasaki, J. Fukushima, T. Kaneko, K. Q. Xin, I. Kudoh, and K. Okuda. 1998. Intranasal administration of HIV-DNA vaccine formulated with a polymer, carboxymethylcellulose, augments mucosal antibody production and cell-mediated immune response. Clin. Immunol. Immunopathol. 88:205-210.[CrossRef][Medline]
79 - Hanke, T., and A. J. McMichael. 2000. Design and construction of an experimental HIV-1 vaccine for a year-2000 clinical trial in Kenya. Nat. Med. 6:951-955.[CrossRef][Medline]
80 - Harding, C. V., and R. Song. 1994. Phagocytic processing of exogenous particulate antigens by macrophages for presentation by class I MHC molecules. J. Immunol. 153:4925-4933.[Abstract]
81 - Harouse, J. M., A. Gettie, R. C. Tan, J. Blanchard, and C. Cheng-Mayer. 1999. Distinct pathogenic sequela in rhesus macaques infected with CCR5 or CXCR4 utilizing SHIVs. Science 284:816-819.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
82 - Heller, L. C., and D. Coppola. 2002. Electrically mediated delivery of vector plasmid DNA elicits an antitumor effect. Gene Ther. 9:1321-1325.[CrossRef][Medline]
83 - Heller, R., M. J. Jaroszeski, L. F. Glass, J. L. Messina, D. P. Rapaport, R. C. DeConti, N. A. Fenske, R. A. Gilbert, L. M. Mir, and D. S. Reintgen. 1996. Phase I/II trial for the treatment of cutaneous and subcutaneous tumors using electrochemotherapy. Cancer 77:964-971.[CrossRef][Medline]
84 - Hengge, U. R., E. F. Chan, R. A. Foster, P. S. Walker, and J. C. Vogel. 1995. Cytokine gene expression in epidermis with biological effects following injection of naked DNA. Nat. Genet. 10:161-166.[CrossRef][Medline]
85 - Herweijer, H., J. S. Latendresse, P. Williams, G. Zhang, I. Danko, S. Schlesinger, and J. A. Wolff. 1995. A plasmid-based self-amplifying Sindbis virus vector. Hum Gene Ther. 6:1161-1167.[Medline]
86 - Hirsch, V. M., and P. R. Johnson. 1994. Pathogenic diversity of simian immunodeficiency viruses. Virus Res. 32:183-203.[CrossRef][Medline]
87 - Ho, D. D., A. U. Neumann, A. S. Perelson, W. Chen, J. M. Leonard, and M. Markowitz. 1995. Rapid turnover of plasma virions and CD4 lymphocytes in HIV-1 infection. Nature 373:123-126.[CrossRef][Medline]
88 - Hocart, M. J., J. S. Mackenzie, and G. A. Stewart. 1989. The IgG subclass responses to influenza virus haemagglutinin in the mouse: effect of route of inoculation. J. Gen. Virol. 70:809-818.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
89 - Hofmann-Lehmann, R., J. Vlasak, A. L. Williams, A. L. Chenine, H. M. McClure, D. C. Anderson, S. O'Neil, and R. M. Ruprecht. 2003. Live attenuated, nef-deleted SIV is pathogenic in most adult macaques after prolonged observation. AIDS 17:157-166.[CrossRef][Medline]
90 - Huang, A. Y., A. T. Bruce, D. M. Pardoll, and H. I. Levitsky. 1996. In vivo cross-priming of MHC class I-restricted antigens requires the TAP transporter. Immunity 4:349-355.[CrossRef][Medline]
91 - Huang, Y., W. P. Kong, and G. J. Nabel. 2001. Human immunodeficiency virus type 1-specific immunity after genetic immunization is enhanced by modification of Gag and Pol expression. J. Virol. 75:4947-4951.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
92 - Igarashi, T., R. Shibata, F. Hasebe, Y. Ami, K. Shinohara, T. Komatsu, C. Stahl-Hennig, H. Petry, G. Hunsmann, T. Kuwata, et al. 1994. Persistent infection with SIVmac chimeric virus having tat, rev, vpu, env and nef of HIV type 1 in macaque monkeys. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses 10:1021-1029.[Medline]
93 - Johnston, R. 2003. AIDSVAX results: an answer, or just more questions? AIDS Patient Care STDS 17:47-51.[CrossRef][Medline]
94 - Karlsson, G. B., M. Halloran, J. Li, I. W. Park, R. Gomila, K. A. Reimann, M. K. Axthelm, S. A. Iliff, N. L. Letvin, and J. Sodroski. 1997. Characterization of molecularly cloned simian-human immunodeficiency viruses causing rapid CD4+ lymphocyte depletion in rhesus monkeys. J. Virol. 71:4218-4225.[Abstract]
95 - Kennedy, R. C. 1997. DNA vaccination for HIV. Nat. Med. 3:501-502.[CrossRef][Medline]
96 - Kim, J. J., V. Ayyavoo, M. L. Bagarazzi, M. A. Chattergoon, K. Dang, B. Wang, J. D. Boyer, and D. B. Weiner. 1997. In vivo engineering of a cellular immune response by coadministration of IL-12 expression vector with a DNA immunogen. J. Immunol. 158:816-826.[Abstract]
97 - Kim, J. J., M. L. Bagarazzi, N. Trivedi, Y. Hu, K. Kazahaya, D. M. Wilson, R. Ciccarelli, M. A. Chattergoon, K. Dang, S. Mahalingam, A. A. Chalian, M. G. Agadjanyan, J. D. Boyer, B. Wang, and D. B. Weiner. 1997. Engineering of in vivo immune responses to DNA immunization via codelivery of costimulatory molecule genes. Nat. Biotechnol. 15:641-646.[CrossRef][Medline]
98 - Kim, J. J., L. K. Nottingham, J. I. Sin, A. Tsai, L. Morrison, J. Oh, K. Dang, Y. Hu, K. Kazahaya, M. Bennett, T. Dentchev, D. M. Wilson, A. A. Chalian, J. D. Boyer, M. G. Agadjanyan, and D. B. Weiner. 1998. CD8-positive T cells influence antigen-specific immune responses through the expression of chemokines. J. Clin. Investig. 102:1112-1124.[Medline]
99 - Kim, J. J., L. K. Nottingham, D. M. Wilson, M. L. Bagarazzi, A. Tsai, L. D. Morrison, A. Javadian, A. A. Chalian, M. G. Agadjanyan, and D. B. Weiner. 1998. Engineering DNA vaccines via co-delivery of co-stimulatory molecule genes. Vaccine 16:1828-1835.[CrossRef][Medline]
100 - Kim, J. J., N. N. Trivedi, L. K. Nottingham, L. Morrison, A. Tsai, Y. Hu, S. Mahalingam, K. Dang, L. Ahn, N. K. Doyle, D. M. Wilson, M. A. Chattergoon, A. A. Chalian, J. D. Boyer, M. G. Agadjanyan, and D. B. Weiner. 1998. Modulation of amplitude and direction of in vivo immune responses by co-administration of cytokine gene expression cassettes with DNA immunogens. Eur. J. Immunol. 28:1089-1103.[CrossRef][Medline]
101 - Kim, J. J., A. Tsai, L. K. Nottingham, L. Morrison, D. M. Cunning, J. Oh, D. J. Lee, K. Dang, T. Dentchev, A. A. Chalian, M. G. Agadjanyan, and D. B. Weiner. 1999. Intracellular adhesion molecule-1 modulates beta-chemokines and directly costimulates T cells in vivo. J. Clin. Investig. 103:869-877.[Medline]
102 - Kim, J. J., J. S. Yang, T. C. VanCott, D. J. Lee, K. H. Manson, M. S. Wyand, J. D. Boyer, K. E. Ugen, and D. B. Weiner. 2000. Modulation of antigen-specific humoral responses in rhesus macaques by using cytokine cDNAs as DNA vaccine adjuvants. J. Virol. 74:3427-3429.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
103 - Kjerrstrom, A., J. Hinkula, G. Engstrom, V. Ovod, K. Krohn, R. Benthin, and B. Wahren. 2001. Interactions of single and combined human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) DNA vaccines. Virology 284:46-61.[CrossRef][Medline]
104 - Klavinskis, L. S., C. Barnfield, L. Gao, and S. Parker. 1999. Intranasal immunization with plasmid DNA-lipid complexes elicits mucosal immunity in the female genital and rectal tracts. J. Immunol. 162:254-262.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
105 - Korber, B., B. Gaschen, K. Yusim, R. Thakallapally, C. Kesmir, and V. Detours. 2001. Evolutionary and immunological implications of contemporary HIV-1 variation. Br. Med. Bull. 58:19-42.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
106 - Kuklin, N., M. Daheshia, K. Karem, E. Manickan, and B. T. Rouse. 1997. Induction of mucosal immunity against herpes simplex virus by plasmid DNA immunization. J. Virol. 71:3138-3145.[Abstract]
107 - Kwong, P. D., M. L. Doyle, D. L. Casper, C. Cicala, S. A. Leavitt, S. Majeed, T. D. Steenbeke, M. Venturi, I. Chaiken, M. Fung, H. Katinger, P. W. Parren, J. Robinson, D. Van Ryk, L. Wang, D. R. Burton, E. Freire, R. Wyatt, J. Sodroski, W. A. Hendrickson, and J. Arthos. 2002. HIV-1 evades antibody-mediated neutralization through conformational masking of receptor-binding sites. Nature 420:678-682.[CrossRef][Medline]
108 - Kwong, P. D., R. Wyatt, J. Robinson, R. W. Sweet, J. Sodroski, and W. A. Hendrickson. 1998. Structure of an HIV gp120 envelope glycoprotein in complex with the CD4 receptor and a neutralizing human antibody. Nature 393:648-659.[CrossRef][Medline]
109 - Learmont, J., B. Tindall, L. Evans, A. Cunningham, P. Cunningham, J. Wells, R. Penny, J. Kaldor, and D. A. Cooper. 1992. Long-term symptomless HIV-1 infection in recipients of blood products from a single donor. Lancet 340:863-867.[CrossRef][Medline]
110 - Learmont, J. C., A. F. Geezy, J. Mills, L. J. Ashton, C. H. Raynes-Greenow, R. J. Garsia, W. B. Dyer, L. McIntyre, R. B. Oelrichs, D. I. Rhodes, N. J. Deacon, and J. S. Sullivan. 1999. Immunologic and virologic status after 14 to 18 years of infection with an attenuated strain of HIV-1. A report from the Sydney Blood Bank Cohort. N. Engl. J. Med. 340:1715-1722.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
111 - Leitner, W. W., L. N. Hwang, M. J. DeVeer, A. Zhou, R. H. Silverman, B. R. Williams, T. W. Dubensky, H. Ying, and N. P. Restifo. 2003. Alphavirus-based DNA vaccine breaks immunological tolerance by activating innate antiviral pathways. Nat. Med. 9:33-39.[CrossRef][Medline]
112 - Letvin, N. L., D. C. Montefiori, Y. Yasutomi, H. C. Perry, M. E. Davies, C. Lekutis, M. Alroy, D. C. Freed, C. I. Lord, L. K. Handt, M. A. Liu, and J. W. Shiver. 1997. Potent, protective anti-HIV immune responses generated by bimodal HIV envelope DNA plus protein vaccination. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:9378-9383.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
113 - Levine, A. M., S. Groshen, J. Allen, K. M. Munson, D. J. Carlo, A. E. Daigle, F. Ferre, F. C. Jensen, S. P. Richieri, R. J. Trauger, J. W. Parker, P. L. Salk, and J. Salk. 1996. Initial studies on active immunization of HIV-infected subjects using a gp120-depleted HIV-1 Immunogen: long-term follow-up. J. Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr. Hum. Retrovirol. 11:351-364.[Medline]
114 - Levy, J. A., C. E. Mackewicz, and E. Barker. 1996. Controlling HIV pathogenesis: the role of the noncytotoxic anti-HIV response of CD8+ T cells. Immunol. Today 17:217-224.[CrossRef][Medline]
115 - Li, J., C. I. Lord, W. Haseltine, N. L. Letvin, and J. Sodroski. 1992. Infection of cynomolgus monkeys with a chimeric HIV-1/SIVmac virus that expresses the HIV-1 envelope glycoproteins. J. Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr. 5:639-646.
116 - Li, J. T., M. Halloran, C. I. Lord, A. Watson, J. Ranchalis, M. Fung, N. L. Letvin, and J. G. Sodroski. 1995. Persistent infection of macaques with simian-human immunodeficiency viruses. J. Virol. 69:7061-7067.[Abstract]
117 - Lieberman, J., and F. R. Frankel. 2002. Engineered Listeria monocytogenes as an AIDS vaccine. Vaccine 20:2007-2010.[CrossRef][Medline]
118 - Liu, X. L., K. R. Clark, and P. R. Johnson. 1999. Production of recombinant adeno-associated virus vectors using a packaging cell line and a hybrid recombinant adenovirus. Gene Ther. 6:293-299.[CrossRef][Medline]
119 - Lohr, F., D. Y. Lo, D. A. Zaharoff, K. Hu, X. Zhang, Y. Li, Y. Zhao, M. W. Dewhirst, F. Yuan, and C. Y. Li. 2001. Effective tumor therapy with plasmid-encoded cytokines combined with in vivo electroporation. Cancer Res 61:3281-3284.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
120 - Loirat, D., Z. Li, M. Mancini, P. Tiollais, D. Paulin, and M. L. Michel. 1999. Muscle-specific expression of hepatitis B surface antigen: no effect on DNA-raised immune responses. Virology 260:74-83.[CrossRef][Medline]
121 - Lu, S., J. Arthos, D. C. Montefiori, Y. Yasutomi, K. Manson, F. Mustafa, E. Johnson, J. C. Santoro, J. Wissink, J. I. Mullins, J. R. Haynes, N. L. Letvin, M. Wyand, and H. L. Robinson. 1996. Simian immunodeficiency virus DNA vaccine trial in macaques. J. Virol. 70:3978-3991.[Abstract]
122 - Lu, S., J. C. Santoro, D. H. Fuller, J. R. Haynes, and H. L. Robinson. 1995. Use of DNAs expressing HIV-1 Env and noninfectious HIV-1 particles to raise antibody responses in mice. Virology 209:147-154.[CrossRef][Medline]
123 - Lu, Y., K. Q. Xin, K. Hamajima, T. Tsuji, I. Aoki, J. Yang, S. Sasaki, J. Fukushima, T. Yoshimura, S. Toda, E. Okada, and K. Okuda. 1999. Macrophage inflammatory protein-1 alpha (MIP-1
) expression plasmid enhances DNA vaccine-induced immune response against HIV-1. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 115:335-341.[CrossRef][Medline]
124 - Luciw, P. A., E. Pratt-Lowe, K. E. Shaw, J. A. Levy, and C. Cheng-Mayer. 1995. Persistent infection of rhesus macaques with T-cell-line-tropic and macrophage-tropic clones of simian/human immunodeficiency viruses (SHIV). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 92:7490-7494.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
125 - MacGregor, R. R., J. D. Boyer, K. E. Ugen, K. E. Lacy, S. J. Gluckman, M. L. Bagarazzi, M. A. Chattergoon, Y. Baine, T. J. Higgins, R. B. Ciccarelli, L. R. Coney, R. S. Ginsberg, and D. B. Weiner. 1998. First human trial of a DNA-based vaccine for treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection: safety and host response. J. Infect. Dis. 178:92-100.[Medline]
126 - MacGregor, R. R., R. Ginsberg, K. E. Ugen, Y. Baine, C. U. Kang, X. M. Tu, T. Higgins, D. B. Weiner, and J. D. Boyer. 2002. T-cell responses induced in normal volunteers immunized with a DNA-based vaccine containing HIV-1 env and rev. AIDS 16:2137-2143.[CrossRef][Medline]
127 - Maeurer, M. J., P. Trinder, G. Hommel, W. Walter, K. Freitag, D. Atkins, and S. Storkel. 2000. Interleukin-7 or interleukin-15 enhances survival of Mycobacterium tuberculosis-infected mice. Infect. Immun. 68:2962-2970.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
128 - Marques, E. T., Jr., P. Chikhlikar, L. B. De Arruda, I. C. Leao, Y. Lu, J. Wong, J. S. Chen, B. Byrne, and J. T. August. 2003. HIV-1 p55Gag encoded in the lysosome-associated membrane protein-1 (LAMP-1) as a DNA plasmid vaccine chimera is highly expressed, traffics to MHC II compartment, and elicits enhanced immune responses. J. Biol. Chem. 278:37926-37936. (First published 24 June 2003; 10.1074/jbc.M303336200.)[Abstract/Free Full Text]
129 - Martin, T., S. E. Parker, R. Hedstrom, T. Le, S. L. Hoffman, J. Norman, P. Hobart, and D. Lew. 1999. Plasmid DNA malaria vaccine: the potential for genomic integration after intramuscular injection. Hum. Gene Ther. 10:759-768.[CrossRef][Medline]
130 - Mata, M., and Y. Paterson. 1999. Th1 T cell responses to HIV-1 Gag protein delivered by a Listeria monocytogenes vaccine are similar to those induced by endogenous listerial antigens. J. Immunol. 163:1449-1456.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
131 - Mata, M., Z. J. Yao, A. Zubair, K. Syres, and Y. Paterson. 2001. Evaluation of a recombinant Listeria monocytogenes expressing an HIV protein that protects mice against viral challenge. Vaccine 19:1435-1445.[CrossRef][Medline]
132 - McCluskie, M. J., C. L. Brazolot Millan, R. A. Gramzinski, H. L. Robinson, J. C. Santoro, J. T. Fuller, G. Widera, J. R. Haynes, R. H. Purcell, and H. L. Davis. 1999. Route and method of delivery of DNA vaccine influence immune responses in mice and non-human primates. Mol. Med. 5:287-300.[CrossRef][Medline]
133 - McCune, J. M. 1997. Animal models of HIV-1 disease. Science 278:2141-2142.[Free Full Text]
134 - McCune, J. M. 2001. The dynamics of CD4+ T-cell depletion in HIV disease. Nature 410:974-979.[CrossRef][Medline]
135 - McCutchan, F. E. 2000. Understanding the genetic diversity of HIV-1. AIDS 14(Suppl. 3):S31-S44.
136 - McDonnell, W. M., and F. K. Askari. 1996. DNA vaccines. N. Engl. J. Med. 334:42-45.[Free Full Text]
137 - McGaughey, G. B., M. Citron, R. C. Danzeisen, F. R. M., V. M. Garsky, W. M. Hurni, J. G. Joyce, X. Liang, M. Miller, J. Shiver, and M. J. Bogusky. 2003. HIV-1 vaccine development: constrained peptide immunogens show improved binding to the anti-HIV-1 gp41 MAb. Biochemistry 25:3214-3223.
138 - Mir, L. M., P. Devauchelle, F. Quintin-Colonna, F. Delisle, S. Doliger, D. Fradelizi, J. Belehradek, Jr., and S. Orlowski. 1997. First clinical trial of cat soft-tissue sarcomas treatment by electrochemotherapy. Br. J. Cancer 76:1617-622.[Medline]
139 - Mosier, D. E., R. J. Gulizia, S. M. Baird, D. B. Wilson, D. H. Spector, and S. A. Spector. 1991. Human immunodeficiency virus infection of human-PBL-SCID mice. Science 251:791-794.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
140 - Murphey-Corb, M., L. N. Martin, B. Davison-Fairburn, R. C. Montelaro, M. Miller, M. West, S. Ohkawa, G. B. Baskin, J. Y. Zhang, S. D. Putney, et al. 1989. A formalin-inactivated whole SIV vaccine confers protection in macaques. Science 246:1293-1297.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
141 - Murphy, C. G., W. T. Lucas, R. E. Means, S. Czajak, C. L. Hale, J. D. Lifson, A. Kaur, R. P. Johnson, D. M. Knipe, and R. C. Desrosiers. 2000. Vaccine protection against simian immunodeficiency virus by recombinant strains of herpes simplex virus. J. Virol. 74:7745-7754.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
142 - Muthumani, K., M. Bagarazzi, D. Conway, D. S. Hwang, K. Manson, R. Ciccarelli, Z. Israel, D. C. Montefiori, K. Ugen, N. Miller, J. Kim, J. Boyer, and D. B. Weiner. 2003. A Gag-Pol/Env-Rev SIV239 DNA vaccine improves CD4 counts, and reduce viral loads after pathogenic intrarectal SIV(mac)251 challenge in rhesus macaques. Vaccine 21:629-637.[CrossRef][Medline]
143 - Myszka, D. G., R. W. Sweet, P. Hensley, M. Brigham-Burke, P. D. Kwong, W. A. Hendrickson, R. Wyatt, J. Sodroski, and M. L. Doyle. 2000. Energetics of the HIV gp120-CD4 binding reaction. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:9026-9031.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
144 - Nacsa, J., J. Stanton, K. J. Kunstman, W. P. Tsai, D. I. Watkins, S. M. Wolinsky, and G. Franchini. 2003. Emergence of cytotoxic T lymphocyte escape mutants following antiretroviral treatment suspension in rhesus macaques infected with SIVmac251. Virology 305:210-218.[CrossRef][Medline]
145 - Nair, S. K., D. Boczkowski, M. Morse, R. I. Cumming, H. K. Lyerly, and E. Gilboa. 1998. Induction of primary carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes in vitro using human dendritic cells transfected with RNA. Nat. Biotechnol. 16:364-369.[CrossRef][Medline]
146 - Newberg, M. H., M. J. Kuroda, W. A. Charini, A. Miura, C. I. Lord, J. E. Schmitz, D. A. Gorgone, M. A. Lifton, K. Kuus-Reichel, and N. L. Letvin. 2002. A simian immunodeficiency virus nef peptide is a dominant cytotoxic T lymphocyte epitope in Indian-origin rhesus monkeys expressing the common MHC class I allele mamu-A*02. Virology 301:365-373.[CrossRef][Medline]
147 - Nichols, W. W., B. J. Ledwith, S. V. Manam, and P. J. Troilo. 1995. Potential DNA vaccine integration into host cell genome. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 772:30-39.[Medline]
148 - Novembre, F. J., J. de Rosayro, S. Nidtha, S. P. O'Neil, T. R. Gibson, T. Evans-Strickfaden, C. E. Hart, and H. M. McClure. 2001. Rapid CD4(+) T-cell loss induced by human immunodeficiency virus type 1(NC) in uninfected and previously infected chimpanzees. J. Virol. 75:1533-1539.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
149 - Novembre, F. J., M. Saucier, D. C. Anderson, S. A. Klumpp, S. P. O'Neil, C. R. Brown, Jr., C. E. Hart, P. C. Guenthner, R. B. Swenson, and H. M. McClure. 1997. Development of AIDS in a chimpanzee infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J. Virol. 71:4086-4091.[Abstract]
150 - Okada, E., S. Sasaki, N. Ishii, I. Aoki, T. Yasuda, K. Nishioka, J. Fukushima, J. Miyazaki, B. Wahren, and K. Okuda. 1997. Intranasal immunization of a DNA vaccine with IL-12- and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF)-expressing plasmids in liposomes induces strong mucosal and cell-mediated immune responses against HIV-1 antigens. J. Immunol. 159:3638-3647.[Abstract]
151 - Otten, G., M. Schaefer, C. Greer, M. Calderon-Cacia, D. Coit, J. Kazzaz, A. Medina-Selby, M. Selby, M. Singh, M. Ugozzoli, J. zur Megede, S. W. Barnett, D. O'Hagan, J. Donnelly, and J. Ulmer. 2003. Induction of broad and potent anti-human immunodeficiency virus immune responses in rhesus macaques by priming with a DNA vaccine and boosting with protein-adsorbed polylactide coglycolide microparticles. J. Virol. 77:6087-6092.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
152 - Pardoll, D. M., and A. M. Beckerleg. 1995. Exposing the immunology of naked DNA vaccines. Immunity 3:165-169.[CrossRef][Medline]
153 - Parren, P. W., J. P. Moore, D. R. Burton, and Q. J. Sattentau, 1999. The neutralizing antibody response to HIV-1: viral evasion and escape from humoral immunity. AIDS 13(Suppl A):S137-S162.
154 - Pertmer, T. M., M. D. Eisenbraun, D. McCabe, S. K. Prayaga, D. H. Fuller, and J. R. Haynes. 1995. Gene gun-based nucleic acid immunization: elicitation of humoral and cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses following epidermal delivery of nanogram quantities of DNA. Vaccine 13:1427-1430.[CrossRef][Medline]
155 - Pontesilli, O., M. R. Klein, S. R. Kerkhof-Garde, N. G. Pakker, F. de Wolf, H. Schuitemaker, and F. Miedema. 1998. Longitudinal analysis of human immunodeficiency virus type 1-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses: a predominant gag-specific response is associated with nonprogressive infection. J. Infect. Dis 178:1008-1018.[Medline]
156 - Popovic, M., M. G. Sarngadharan, E. Read, and R. C. Gallo. 1984. Detection, isolation, and continuous production of cytopathic retroviruses (HTLV-III) from patients with AIDS and pre-AIDS. Science 224:497-500.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
157 - Porgador, A., K. R. Irvine, A. Iwasaki, B. H. Barber, N. P. Restifo, and R. N. Germain. 1998. Predominant role for directly transfected dendritic cells in antigen presentation to CD8+ T cells after gene gun immunization. J. Exp. Med. 188:1075-1082.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
158 - Preston, B. D. 1997. Reverse transcriptase fidelity and HIV-1 variation. Science 275:228-229.[CrossRef][Medline]
159 - Putkonen, P., M. Quesada-Rolander, A. C. Leandersson, S. Schwartz, R. Thorstensson, K. Okuda, B. Wahren, and J. Hinkula. 1998. Immune responses but no protection against SHIV by gene-gun delivery of HIV-1 DNA followed by recombinant subunit protein boosts. Virology 250:293-301.[CrossRef][Medline]
160 - Putkonen, P., K. Warstedt, R. Thorstensson, R. Benthin, J. Albert, B. Lundgren, B. Oberg, E. Norrby, and G. Biberfeld. 1989. Experimental infection of cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis) with simian immunodeficiency virus (SIVsm). J. Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr. 2:359-365.
161 - Raz, E., D. A. Carson, S. E. Parker, T. B. Parr, A. M. Abai, G. Aichinger, S. H. Gromkowski, M. Singh, D. Lew, M. A. Yankauckas, et al. 1994. Intradermal gene immunization: the possible role of DNA uptake in the induction of cellular immunity to viruses. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:9519-9523.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
162 - Redfield, R. R., D. C. Wright, W. D. James, T. S. Jones, C. Brown, and D. S. Burke. 1987. Disseminated vaccinia in a military recruit with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 316:673-676.[Medline]
163 - Reimann, K. A., J. T. Li, R. Veazey, M. Halloran, I. W. Park, G. B. Karlsson, J. Sodroski, and N. L. Letvin. 1996. A chimeric simian/human immunodeficiency virus expressing a primary patient human immunodeficiency virus type 1 isolate env causes an AIDS-like disease after in vivo passage in rhesus monkeys. J. Virol. 70:6922-6928.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
164 - Robinson, H. L. 2002. New hope for an AIDS vaccine. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2:239-250.[CrossRef][Medline]
165 - Robinson, H. L., L. A. Hunt, and R. G. Webster. 1993. Protection against a lethal influenza virus challenge by immunization with a haemagglutinin-expressing plasmid DNA. Vaccine 11:957-960.[CrossRef][Medline]
166 - Rodriguez-Cuevas, S., S. Barroso-Bravo, J. Almanza-Estrada, L. Cristobal-Martinez, and E. Gonzalez-Rodriguez. 2001. Electrochemotherapy in primary and metastatic skin tumors: phase II trial using intralesional bleomycin. Arch. Med. Res. 32:273-276.[CrossRef][Medline]
167 - Rose, N. F., P. A. Marx, A. Luckay, D. F. Nixon, W. J. Moretto, S. M. Donahoe, D. Montefiori, A. Roberts, L. Buonocore, and J. K. Rose. 2001. An effective AIDS vaccine based on live attenuated vesicular stomatitis virus recombinants. Cell 106:539-549.[CrossRef][Medline]
168 - Sasaki, S., R. R. Amara, A. E. Oran, J. M. Smith, and H. L. Robinson. 2001. Apoptosis-mediated enhancement of DNA-raised immune responses by mutant caspases. Nat. Biotechnol. 19:543-547.[CrossRef][Medline]
169 - Sauter, B., M. L. Albert, L. Francisco, M. Larsson, S. Somersan, and N. Bhardwaj. 2000. Consequences of cell death: exposure to necrotic tumor cells, but not primary tissue cells or apoptotic cells, induces the maturation of immunostimulatory dendritic cells. J. Exp. Med. 191:423-434.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
170 - Schmitz, J. E., M. J. Kuroda, S. Santra, V. G. Sasseville, M. A. Simon, M. A. Lifton, P. Racz, K. Tenner-Racz, M. Dalesandro, B. J. Scallon, J. Ghrayeb, M. A. Forman, D. C. Montefiori, E. P. Rieber, N. L. Letvin, and K. A. Reimann. 1999. Control of viremia in simian immunodeficiency virus infection by CD8+ lymphocytes. Science 283:857-860.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
171 - Schuitemaker, H., M. Koot, N. A. Kootstra, M. W. Dercksen, R. E. de Goede, R. P. van Steenwijk, J. M. Lange, J. K. Schattenkerk, F. Miedema, and M. Tersmette. 1992. Biological phenotype of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 clones at different stages of infection: progression of disease is associated with a shift from monocytotropic to T-cell-tropic virus population. J. Virol. 66:1354-1360.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
172 - Shata, M. T., M. S. Reitz, Jr., A. L. DeVico, G. K. Lewis, and D. M. Hone. 2001. Mucosal and systemic HIV-1 Env-specific CD8(+) T-cells develop after intragastric vaccination with a Salmonella Env DNA vaccine vector. Vaccine 20:623-629.[CrossRef][Medline]
173 - Shen, L., Z. W. Chen, M. D. Miller, V. Stallard, G. P. Mazzara, D. L. Panicali, and N. L. Letvin. 1991. Recombinant virus vaccine-induced SIV-specific CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Science 252:440-443.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
174 - Shiver, J. W., M. E. Davies, H. C. Perry, D. C. Freed, and M. A. Liu. 1996. Humoral and cellular immunities elicited by HIV-1 vaccination. J. Pharm. Sci. 85:1317-1324.[CrossRef][Medline]
175 - Shiver, J. W., M. E. Davies, Y. Yasutomi, H. C. Perry, D. C. Freed, N. L. Letvin, and M. A. Liu. 1997. Anti-HIV env immunities elicited by nucleic acid vaccines. Vaccine 15:884-887.[CrossRef][Medline]
176 - Shiver, J. W., T. M. Fu, L. Chen, D. R. Casimiro, M. E. Davies, R. K. Evans, Z. Q. Zhang, A. J. Simon, W. L. Trigona, S. A. Dubey, L. Huang, V. A. Harris, R. S. Long, X. Liang, L. Handt, W. A. Schleif, L. Zhu, D. C. Freed, N. V. Persaud, L. Guan, K. S. Punt, A. Tang, M. Chen, K. A. Wilson, K. B. Collins, G. J. Heidecker, V. R. Fernandez, H. C. Perry, J. G. Joyce, K. M. Grimm, J. C. Cook, P. M. Keller, D. S. Kresock, H. Mach, R. D. Troutman, L. A. Isopi, D. M. Williams, Z. Xu, K. E. Bohannon, D. B. Volkin, D. C. Montefiori, A. Miura, G. R. Krivulka, M. A. Lifton, M. J. Kuroda, J. E. Schmitz, N. L. Letvin, M. J. Caulfield, A. J. Bett, R. Youil, D. C. Kaslow, and E. A. Emini. 2002. Replication-incompetent adenoviral vaccine vector elicits effective anti-immunodeficiency-virus immunity. Nature 415:331-335.[CrossRef][Medline]
177 - Sin, J. I., M. Bagarazzi, C. Pachuk, and D. B. Weiner. 1999. DNA priming-protein boosting enhances both antigen-specific antibody and Th1-type cellular immune responses in a murine herpes simplex virus-2 gD vaccine model. DNA Cell Biol. 18:771-779.[CrossRef][Medline]
178 - Sin, J. I., J. J. Kim, R. L. Arnold, K. E. Shroff, D. McCallus, C. Pachuk, S. P. McElhiney, M. W. Wolf, S. J. Pompa-de Bruin, T. J. Higgins, R. B. Ciccarelli, and D. B. Weiner. 1999. IL-12 gene as a DNA vaccine adjuvant in a herpes mouse model: IL-12 enhances Th1-type CD4+ T cell-mediated protective immunity against herpes simplex virus-2 challenge. J. Immunol. 162:2912-2921.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
179 - Sin, J. I., J. J. Kim, J. D. Boyer, R. B. Ciccarelli, T. J. Higgins, and D. B. Weiner. 1999. In vivo modulation of vaccine-induced immune responses toward a Th1 phenotype increases potency and vaccine effectiveness in a herpes simplex virus type 2 mouse model. J. Virol. 73:501-509.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
180 - Sin, J. I., J. J. Kim, D. Zhang, and D. B. Weiner. 2001. Modulation of cellular responses by plasmid CD40L: CD40L plasmid vectors enhance antigen-specific helper T cell type 1 CD4+ T cell-mediated protective immunity against herpes simplex virus type 2 in vivo. Hum. Gene Ther. 12:1091-1102.[CrossRef][Medline]
181 - Singh, M., M. Briones, G. Ott, and D. O'Hagan. 2000. Cationic microparticles: a potent delivery system for DNA vaccines. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:811-816.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
182 - Srivastava, P. K., H. Udono, N. E. Blachere, and Z. Li. 1994. Heat shock proteins transfer peptides during antigen processing and CTL priming. Immunogenetics 39:93-98.[Medline]
183 - Staerz, U. D., H. Karasuyama, and A. M. Garner. 1987. Cytotoxic T lymphocytes against a soluble protein. Nature 329:449-451.[CrossRef][Medline]
184 - Stott, E. J. 1991. Anti-cell antibody in macaques. Nature 353:393.[Medline]
185 - Takahashi, H., Y. Nakagawa, C. D. Pendleton, R. A. Houghten, K. Yokomuro, R. N. Germain, and J. A. Berzofsky. 1992. Induction of broadly cross-reactive cytotoxic T cells recognizing an HIV-1 envelope determinant. Science 255:333-336.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
186 - Tang, D. C., M. DeVit, and S. A. Johnston. 1992. Genetic immunization is a simple method for eliciting an immune response. Nature 356:152-154.[CrossRef][Medline]
187 - Titomirov, A. V., S. Sukharev, and E. Kistanova. 1991. In vivo electroporation and stable transformation of skin cells of newborn mice by plasmid DNA. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1088:131-134.[Medline]
188 - Tollefsen, S., T. Tjelle, J. Schneider, M. Harboe, H. Wiker, G. Hewinson, K. Huygen, and I. Mathiesen. 2002. Improved cellular and humoral immune responses against Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigens after intramuscular DNA immunisation combined with muscle electroporation. Vaccine 20:3370-3378.[CrossRef][Medline]
189 - Torres, C. A., A. Iwasaki, B. H. Barber, and H. L. Robinson. 1997. Differential dependence on target site tissue for gene gun and intramuscular DNA immunizations. J. Immunol. 158:4529-4532.[Abstract]
190 - Udono, H., and P. K. Srivastava. 1993. Heat shock protein 70-associated peptides elicit specific cancer immunity. J. Exp. Med. 178:1391-1396.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
191 - Ulmer, J. B., R. R. Deck, C. M. Dewitt, J. I. Donnhly, and M. A. Liu. 1996. Generation of MHC class I-restricted cytotoxic T lymphocytes by expression of a viral protein in muscle cells: antigen presentation by non-muscle cells. Immunology 89:59-67.[CrossRef][Medline]
192 - Ulmer, J. B., J. J. Donnelly, S. E. Parker, G. H. Rhodes, P. L. Felgner, V. J. Dwarki, S. H. Gromkowski, R. R. Deck, C. M. DeWitt, A. Friedman, et al. 1993. Heterologous protection against influenza by injection of DNA encoding a viral protein. Science 259:1745-1749.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
193 - Veazey, R. S., P. A. Marx, and A. A. Lackner. 2001. The mucosal immune system: primary target for HIV infection and AIDS. Trends Immunol. 22:626-633.[CrossRef][Medline]
194 - Veazey, R. S., R. J. Shattock, M. Pope, J. C. Kirijan, J. Jones, Q. Hu, T. Ketas, P. A. Marx, P. J. Klasse, D. R. Burton, and J. P. Moore. 2003. Prevention of virus transmission to macaque monkeys by a vaginally applied monoclonal antibody to HIV-1 gp120. Nat. Med. 9:343-346.[CrossRef][Medline]
195 - Wang, B., J. Boyer, V. Srikantan, L. Coney, R. Carrano, C. Phan, M. Merva, K. Dang, M. Agadjanan, L. Gilbert, et al. 1993. DNA inoculation induces neutralizing immune responses against human immunodeficiency virus type 1 in mice and nonhuman primates. DNA Cell Biol. 12:799-805.[Medline]
196 - Wang, B., J. Boyer, V. Srikantan, K. Ugen, L. Gilbert, C. Phan, K. Dang, M. Merva, M. G. Agadjanyan, M. Newman, et al. 1995. Induction of humoral and cellular immune responses to the human immunodeficiency type 1 virus in nonhuman primates by in vivo DNA inoculation. Virology 211:102-112.[CrossRef][Medline]
197 - Wang, B., K. Dang, M. G. Agadjanyan, V. Srikantan, F. Li, K. E. Ugen, J. Boyer, M. Merva, W. V. Williams, and D. B. Weiner. 1997. Mucosal immunization with a DNA vaccine induces immune responses against HIV-1 at a mucosal site. Vaccine 15:821-825.[CrossRef][Medline]
198 - Wang, B., K. E. Ugen, V. Srikantan, M. G. Agadjanyan, K. Dang, Y. Refaeli, A. I. Sato, J. Boyer, W. V. Williams, and D. B. Weiner. 1993. Gene inoculation generates immune responses against human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90:4156-4160.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
199 - Wang, R., D. L. Doolan, T. P. Le, R. C. Hedstrom, K. M. Coonan, Y. Charoenvit, T. R. Jones, P. Hobart, M. Margalith, J. Ng, W. R. Weiss, M. Sedegah, C. de Taisne, J. A. Norman, and S. L. Hoffman. 1998. Induction of antigen-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes in humans by a malaria DNA vaccine. Science 282:476-480.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
200 - Watanabe, M. E. 2003. Skeptical scientists skewer VaxGen statistics. Nat. Med. 9:376.[Medline]
201 - Weissman, D., H. Ni, D. Scales, A. Dude, J. Capodici, K. McGibney, A. Abdool, S. N. Isaacs, G. Cannon, and K. Kariko. 2000. HIV gag mRNA transfection of dendritic cells (DC) delivers encoded antigen to MHC class I and II molecules, causes DC maturation, and induces a potent human in vitro primary immune response. J. Immunol. 165:4710-4717.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
202 - Whitmire, J. K., and R. Ahmed. 2000. Costimulation in antiviral immunity: differential requirements for CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 12:448-455.[CrossRef][Medline]
203 - Widera, G., M. Austin, D. Rabussay, C. Goldbeck, S. W. Barnett, M. Chen, L. Leung, G. R. Otten, K. Thudium, M. J. Selby, and J. B. Ulmer. 2000. Increased DNA vaccine delivery and immunogenicity by electroporation in vivo. J. Immunol. 164:4635-4640.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
204 - Wolff, J. A., J. J. Ludtke, G. Acsadi, P. Williams, and A. Jani. 1992. Long-term persistence of plasmid DNA and foreign gene expression in mouse muscle. Hum. Mol. Genet. 1:363-369.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
205 - Wolff, J. A., R. W. Malone, P. Williams, W. Chong, G. Aesadi, A. Jani, and P. L. Felgner. 1990. Direct gene transfer into mouse muscle in vivo. Science 247:1465-1468.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
206 - Xiang, S. H., P. D. Kwong, R. Gupta, C. D. Rizzuto, D. J. Casper, R. Wyatt, L. Wang, W. A. Hendrickson, M. L. Doyle, and J. Sodroski. 2002. Mutagenic stabilization and/or disruption of a CD4-bound state reveals distinct confromation of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 gp120 envelope glycoprotein. J. Virol. 76:9888-9899.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
207 - Xiang, Z., and H. C. Ertl. 1995. Manipulation of the immune response to a plasmid-encoded viral antigen by coinoculation with plasmids expressing cytokines. Immunity 2:129-135.[CrossRef][Medline]
208 - Xin, K. Q., K. Hamajima, S. Sasaki, A. Honsho, T. Tsuji, N. Ishii, X. R. Cao, Y. Lu, J. Fukushima, P. Shapshak, S. Kawamoto, and K. Okuda. 1998. Intranasal administration of human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV-1) DNA vaccine with interleukin-2 expression plasmid enhances cell-mediated immunity against HIV-1. Immunology 94:438-444.[CrossRef][Medline]
209 - Xin, K. Q., K. Hamajima, S. Sasaki, T. Tsuji, S. Watabe, E. Okada, and K. Okuda. 1999. IL-15 expression plasmid enhances cell-mediated immunity induced by an HIV-1 DNA vaccine. Vaccine 17:858-866.[CrossRef][Medline]
210 - Xin, K. Q., Y. Lu, K. Hamajima, J. Fukushima, J. Yang, K. Inamura, and K. Okuda. 1999. Immunization of RANTES expression plasmid with a DNA vaccine enhances HIV-1-specific immunity. Clin. Immunol. 92:90-96.[CrossRef][Medline]
211 - Xu, F., M. Hong, and J. B. Ulmer. 2003. Immunogenicity of an HIV-1 gag DNA vaccine carried by attenuated Shigella. Vaccine 21:644-648.[CrossRef][Medline]
212 - Yajima, T., H. Nishimura, R. Ishimitsu, T. Watase, D. H. Busch, E. G. Pamer, H. Kuwano, and Y. Yoshikai. 2002. Overexpression of IL-15 in vivo increases antigen-driven memory CD8+ T cells following a microbe exposure. J. Immunol. 168:1198-1203.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
213 - Yang, Z. Y., L. S. Wyatt, W. P. Kong, Z. Moodie, B. Moss, and G. J. Nabel. 2003. Overcoming immunity to a viral vaccine by DNA priming before vector boosting. J. Virol. 77:799-803.
214 - Yasutomi, Y., S. Koenig, S. S. Haun, C. K. Stover, R. K. Jackson, P. Conard, A. J. Conley, E. A. Emini, T. R. Fuerst, and N. L. Letvin. 1993. Immunization with recombinant BCG-SIV elicits SIV-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes in rhesus monkeys. J. Immunol. 150:3101-3107.[Abstract]
215 - Zhang, X., S. Sun, I. Hwang, D. F. Tough, and J. Sprent. 1998. Potent and selective stimulation of memory-phenotype CD8+ T cells in vivo by IL-15. Immunity 8:591-599.[CrossRef][Medline]
216 - Zhang, Z. Q., T. M. Fu, D. R. Casimiro, M. E. Davies, X. Liang, W. A. Schleif, L. Handt, L. Tussey, M. Chen, A. Tang, K. A. Wilson, W. L. Trigona, D. C. Freed, C. Y. Tan, M. Horton, E. A. Emini, and J. W. Shiver. 2002. Mamu-A*01 allele-mediated attenuation of disease progression in simian-human immunodeficiency virus infection. J. Virol. 76:12845-12854.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
217 - Zhong, L., A. Granelli-Piperno, Y. Choi, and R. M. Steinman. 1999. Recombinant adenovirus is an efficient and non-perturbing genetic vector for human dendritic cells. Eur. J. Immunol. 29:964-972.[CrossRef][Medline]
218 - Zhou, X., P. Berglund, G. Rhodes, S. E. Parker, M. Jondal, and P. Liljestrom. 1994. Self-replicating Semliki Forest virus RNA as recombinant vaccine. Vaccine 12:1510-1514.[CrossRef][Medline]
219 - zur Megede, J., M. C. Chen, B. Doe, M. Schaefer, C. E. Greer, M. Selby, G. R. Otten, and S. W. Barnett. 2000. Increased expression and immunogenicity of sequence-modified human immunodeficiency virus type 1 gag gene. J. Virol. 74:2628-2635.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Clinical Microbiology Reviews, April 2004, p. 370-389, Vol. 17, No. 2
0893-8512/04/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/CMR.17.2.370-389.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Chege, G. K., Shephard, E. G., Meyers, A., van Harmelen, J., Williamson, C., Lynch, A., Gray, C. M., Rybicki, E. P., Williamson, A.-L.
(2008). HIV-1 subtype C Pr55gag virus-like particle vaccine efficiently boosts baboons primed with a matched DNA vaccine. J. Gen. Virol.
89: 2214-2227
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Wilson, C. C., Newman, M. J., Livingston, B. D., MaWhinney, S., Forster, J. E., Scott, J., Schooley, R. T., Benson, C. A.
(2008). Clinical Phase 1 Testing of the Safety and Immunogenicity of an Epitope-Based DNA Vaccine in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1-Infected Subjects Receiving Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy. CVI
15: 986-994
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Gupta, S., Leutenegger, C. M., Dean, G. A., Steckbeck, J. D., Cole, K. S., Sparger, E. E.
(2007). Vaccination of Cats with Attenuated Feline Immunodeficiency Virus Proviral DNA Vaccine Expressing Gamma Interferon. J. Virol.
81: 465-473
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Stone, G. W., Barzee, S., Snarsky, V., Spina, C. A., Lifson, J. D., Pillai, V. K. B., Amara, R. R., Villinger, F., Kornbluth, R. S.
(2006). Macaque Multimeric Soluble CD40 Ligand and GITR Ligand Constructs Are Immunostimulatory Molecules In Vitro. CVI
13: 1223-1230
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Stone, G. W., Barzee, S., Snarsky, V., Kee, K., Spina, C. A., Yu, X.-F., Kornbluth, R. S.
(2006). Multimeric Soluble CD40 Ligand and GITR Ligand as Adjuvants for Human Immunodeficiency Virus DNA Vaccines. J. Virol.
80: 1762-1772
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Hegde, R., Liu, Z., Mackay, G., Smith, M., Chebloune, Y., Narayan, O., Singh, D. K.
(2005). Antigen Expression Kinetics and Immune Responses of Mice Immunized with Noninfectious Simian-Human Immunodeficiency Virus DNA. J. Virol.
79: 14688-14697
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Martin, F., Roth, D. M., Jans, D. A., Pouton, C. W., Partridge, L. J., Monk, P. N., Moseley, G. W.
(2005). Tetraspanins in Viral Infections: a Fundamental Role in Viral Biology?. J. Virol.
79: 10839-10851
[Full Text]
-
Beddows, S., Schulke, N., Kirschner, M., Barnes, K., Franti, M., Michael, E., Ketas, T., Sanders, R. W., Maddon, P. J., Olson, W. C., Moore, J. P.
(2005). Evaluating the Immunogenicity of a Disulfide-Stabilized, Cleaved, Trimeric Form of the Envelope Glycoprotein Complex of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1. J. Virol.
79: 8812-8827
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Wang, R., Richie, T. L., Baraceros, M. F., Rahardjo, N., Gay, T., Banania, J.-G., Charoenvit, Y., Epstein, J. E., Luke, T., Freilich, D. A., Norman, J., Hoffman, S. L.
(2005). Boosting of DNA Vaccine-Elicited Gamma Interferon Responses in Humans by Exposure to Malaria Parasites. Infect. Immun.
73: 2863-2872
[Abstract]
[Full Text]