Induction of antigen-specific immunity with monoclonal anti-idiotypic antibodies in vivo: differences in potency and comparison of immunochemical properties

Mouse monoclonal anti-idiotypic antibodies to HIV p24: immunochemical properties and internal imagery

Two mouse monoclonal antibodies (VIC5 and VIC6; referred to as Ab1) reacting with the p24 core antigen of HIV-1 were used to produce mouse monoclonal anti-idiotypic antibodies (Ab2). Six anti-idiotypic antibodies were characterized. The five anti-idiotypic antibodies directed against VIC6 partly competed which each other and thus defined a set of overlapping idiotypes on Ab1. All 6 Ab2s inhibited the binding of the corresponding anti-p24 antibody to antigen, although four (W1, Y16, Y6, X14) were markedly more inhibitory than the remaining two (G6, Y11). All six Ab2s were antigen-inhibitable; however the interaction of G6 and Y11 with Ab1 was blocked with considerably less soluble p24 antigen than the remaining four. Correspondingly, G6 and Y11 had lower affinities for Ab1 than did W1, Y6 and X14; the affinity index of Y16 was equivalent to that of Y11. None of the Ab2s reacted with H or L chains of Ab1 after reduction on SDS-gels. Similarly, both Ab1s failed to react with the H or L chains of Ab2. These criteria appeared to define at least four of these Ab2s as internal image antibodies whose image is composed of both H and L chains. The anti-idiotypic antibodies were injected either individually or as a combined preparation of all 6 into syngeneic mice and Porton rats. Despite the presence of anti-anti-idiotypic antibodies (Ab3) in these animals, when used individually no antigen-specific antibodies were found. A small response to p24 antigen was induced in 3 of 6 mice using preparations containing all 6 anti-idiotypes.

Anti-Leu3a induces combining site-related anti-idiotypic antibody without inducing anti-HIV activity

Development of a vaccine for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) has proven difficult, and so alternative approaches such as idiotypic manipulation have been suggested. As applied to AIDS, this approach could involve immunizing with an anti-CD4 antibody resembling gp120, to induce anti-idiotypic antibodies which would bind to gp120. The CD4 binding site on gp120 is conserved, and so, such an immune response should protect against all variants. Induction of anti-human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) immunity has been reported using anti-Leu3a, and this result has led to testing in humans. Negative results obtained by others have been attributed to differences in immunization protocols. Because of the importance of this question, we reinvestigated the potential of anti-Leu3a to induce anti-HIV antibodies, compared with control immunizations with OKT4A (another anti-CD4 antibody) and the irrelevant Ig MOPC-21. Responses to anti-Leu3a showed induction of high-titer anti-idiotypic activity, and included combining-site-related activity. Yet sera showed no binding to gp160 above controls and no detectable neutralizing activity in a sensitive HIV plaque assay, so the anti-idiotypes induced were not internal images of CD4. We conclude that the pronounced anti-HIV responses reported with anti-Leu3a cannot be generalized, and thus that anti-Leu3a does not offer promise as an HIV vaccine. However, these results do not negate the promise of the idiotypic approach, and a vaccine for AIDS based on idiotype manipulation remains a possibility.