Immune systems rather than antigenic epitopes elicit and produce protective antibodies against HIV

Mobility and disorder in antibody and antigen binding sites do not prevent immunochemical recognition

The known polyspecificity of antibodies, which is crucial for efficient immune response, is determined by the conformational flexibility and intrinsic disorder encoded in local peculiarities of the amino acid sequence of antibodies within or in the vicinity of their complementarity determining regions. Similarly, epitopes represent fuzzy binding sites, which are also characterized by local structural flexibility. Existing data suggest that the efficient interactions between antigens and antibodies rely on the conformational mobility and some disorder of their binding sites and therefore can be relatively well described by the "flexible lock - adjustable key" model, whereas both, extreme order (rigid lock-and-key) and extreme disorder (viral shape-shifters) are not compatible with the efficient antigen-antibody interactions and are not present in immune interactions.

Broadly Neutralizing Antibodies against HIV: Back to Blood

After years of continuous exposure to HIV envelope antigens, a minority of HIV-infected individuals develop a cognate polyclonal humoral response comprising very potent and extremely cross-reactive neutralizing antibodies [broadly neutralizing antibodies (bNAbs)]. Isolated bNAbs derived from memory B cell pools have been the focus of intense studies over the past decade. However, it is not yet known how to translate the features of bNAbs into practical HIV prevention methods. In this review, we attempt to seek insights from emerging information about the human broadly neutralizing plasma response as well as its frequency, clonal composition, specificity, potency, and commonality among infected subjects. We also consider how this information points to selecting and prioritizing certain epitope targets and strategies for HIV vaccine design.

Viral species, viral genomes and HIV vaccine design: is the rational design of biological complexity a utopia?

A common logical confusion is prevalent in the whole of biology, namely that biological species are viewed both as an abstract category in an hierarchical classification and as a concrete kind of organism. This is partly due to the fact that the vast majority of living organisms do not have common names that differ from the Latin name of the species to which the organism belongs. However, it is somewhat astonishing that the same confusion exists in virology since every virus has a common name, different from the species name to which the virus belongs, which could be used to refer to the infectious viral entity as a concrete material object. The original 1991 ICTV definition of virus species stated that a virus species is a polythetic class of viruses and thus that a species is a class, namely a conceptual construction of the mind and not a physical, real object located in space and time. In 2013, the ICTV redefined a virus species no longer as a class but as a material object consisting of a monophyletic group of viruses that were all physically part of the species. This new definition is reminiscent of an earlier school of thought known as bionominalism which considered species to be concrete individuals rather than classes. Both bionominalism and the new ICTV definition are based on the logical fallacy of reification which treats abstractions such as classes as if they were concrete physical entities. The implications of this new ontology of virus species for virus taxonomy and for the possibility of incorporating nucleotide metagenomic sequences in the current ICTV classification is discussed.

Fundamental challenges to the development of a preventive HIV vaccine

There is consensus that only a preventive vaccine can contain the HIV/AIDS pandemic. After 30 years still there is no preventive HIV vaccine. This article examines fundamental challenges to the development of a preventive HIV vaccine. They include the initially erroneous but powerful perception of the natural history of HIV disease, as an acute rather than a chronic illness even in the absence of therapy, the lack of appreciation of the quasispecies biology of HIV and the abandonment of principles of immunology theory caused by the allure of technological prowess. In addition two other important aspects are discussed: vaccines directed against transmitted/founder viruses (T/F) and the reconsideration of HIV inactivation as a viable means to obtain a preventive HIV vaccine using novel safe methods of inactivation not available during the early years of the pandemic.

Development of a Preventive HIV Vaccine Requires Solving Inverse Problems Which Is Unattainable by Rational Vaccine Design

Hypotheses and theories are essential constituents of the scientific method. Many vaccinologists are unaware that the problems they try to solve are mostly inverse problems that consist in imagining what could bring about a desired outcome. An inverse problem starts with the result and tries to guess what are the multiple causes that could have produced it. Compared to the usual direct scientific problems that start with the causes and derive or calculate the results using deductive reasoning and known mechanisms, solving an inverse problem uses a less reliable inductive approach and requires the development of a theoretical model that may have different solutions or none at all. Unsuccessful attempts to solve inverse problems in HIV vaccinology by reductionist methods, systems biology and structure-based reverse vaccinology are described. The popular strategy known as rational vaccine design is unable to solve the multiple inverse problems faced by HIV vaccine developers. The term “rational” is derived from “rational drug design” which uses the 3D structure of a biological target for designing molecules that will selectively bind to it and inhibit its biological activity. In vaccine design, however, the word “rational” simply means that the investigator is concentrating on parts of the system for which molecular information is available. The economist and Nobel laureate Herbert Simon introduced the concept of “bounded rationality” to explain why the complexity of the world economic system makes it impossible, for instance, to predict an event like the financial crash of 2007–2008. Humans always operate under unavoidable constraints such as insufficient information, a limited capacity to process huge amounts of data and a limited amount of time available to reach a decision. Such limitations always prevent us from achieving the complete understanding and optimization of a complex system that would be needed to achieve a truly rational design process. This is why the complexity of the human immune system prevents us from rationally designing an HIV vaccine by solving inverse problems.