Neonatal immunization prevents the development of a chronic autoimmune response against CD4 caused by HIV-1 gp120 in rats.

The AIDS autoimmune hypothesis suggests that suppression of the autoimmunity against CD4 T lymphocytes should positively affect the course of HIV infection. The aim of this study was to determine whether neonatal immunization can be used to prevent induction of anti-CD4 autoimmune response triggered by HIV-1. The induction of anti-CD4 lymphocytes in HIV infection proceeds via their idiotypic interactions with anti-gp120 lymphocytes; therefore, the creation of tolerance to gp120 by means of neonatal immunization with gp120 may prevent subsequent induction of anti-CD4 lymphocytes. Neonatal immunization with CD4 may also be effective, since it can increase natural tolerance to CD4 and prevent its subsequent breakdown by gp120. Thus, anti-gp120 lymphocytes and anti-CD4 lymphocytes are potential neonatal stimulation targets. To determine which of these targets can be manipulated during the neonatal period, a computer model of the immune network was used. The computer model predictions were tested in a rat model of autoimmune CD4 T lymphocytopenia induced by gp120. The in silico studies predicted that stimulating a clone against an external antigen that is in idiotype-anti-idiotype interactions with an autoclone, when stimulation is performed during the time that the dynamic behavior type of the immune network is being established, changes the autoimmune response from self-perpetuating to transient. Experimental studies confirmed the predictions of the computer model and showed that neonatal immunization with gp120 suppresses anti-CD4 autoantibody production and prevents the development of autoimmune CD4 T lymphocytopenia triggered in adult rats by gp120. Neonatal HIV-1 gp120 immunization enhances natural tolerance to CD4.

Comparison of the specificity of rheumatoid factor detected by latex fixation with that of regulatory rheumatoid factor.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid factor (RF), originally defined as pathological autoantibodies to IgG that are detected in rheumatoid arthritis, turned out to be multi-specific antibodies, some of which exhibit immunoregulatory properties. Recently, we identified a RF, the production of which confers resistance to experimental autoimmune diseases and is associated with the remission of autoimmune diseases. To differentiate the RF, we discovered from the one associated with rheumatic disease onset or progression and to reflect its immunoregulatory properties, we named it regulatory rheumatoid factor (regRF). Immunization with conformers of Fc fragments that expose regRF neoepitopes reduces collagen-induced arthritis in rats. Certain information about the specificity of classical RF and regRF indicates that these populations may be one and the same. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference between the classical RF and regRF. METHODS: Classical RF was measured in diseased blood by the latex fixation method, and regRF was detected by the agglutination of human IgG-loaded tanned erythrocytes. Competitive analysis was used to determine the specificity of rheumatoid factors. RESULTS: It was found that regRF and pathology-associated RF constitute different antibody populations. Pathology-associated RF is specific for lyophilized IgG. RegRF does not interact with IgG. RegRF is specific to conformers of IgG Fc fragments that have a reduced hinge. In latex-positive rheumatoid arthritis sera, regRF may be present in addition to pathology-associated RF. The latex fixation method detects both rheumatoid factor populations. CONCLUSION: RegRF and classical pathology-associated RF have different specificity.