Back

Inhibitory potential of autologous neutralizing antibodies sets quantitative limits on the rebound-competent HIV-1 reservoir

Garcia, M. A.; Farrell-Sherman, A.; Zhuo, J.; Fray, E. J.; Zinsser, A. M.; Aydin, B.; Sowers, K.; Li, H.; Lopez, B. M.; Abeyta-Lopez, A.; Chu, T.; Lubbeck, D.; Chae, M.; Varriale, J.; Westfall, D. H.; Lai, J.; Hoh, R.; Dalhuisen, T.; Simonetti, F. R.; Peluso, M. J.; Deeks, S. G.; Siliciano, R. F.; Cohn, L. B.; Siliciano, J. D.

2025-12-09 immunology
10.64898/2025.12.07.692769 bioRxiv
Show abstract

HIV-1 cure requires preventing viral rebound after treatment interruption, but quantitative criteria defining the rebound-competent reservoir are lacking. We studied individuals undergoing observational treatment interruption to identify virologic and immunologic determinants of rebound. In 9 of 13 participants, rebound viruses were genetically identical or similar to proviruses in circulating resting CD4 T-cells. We found no evidence of recombination among rebound sequences, rather resistance to autologous neutralizing antibodies was a critical determinant of viral rebound. Using inhibitory potential (IP), the log reduction in single-round infection at physiologic IgG concentrations, we defined quantitative limits governing rebound-competency. Reservoir variants exhibited a wide range of IP values (0.4-8.2 logs), whereas rebound viruses were minimally inhibited (0.5-2.8 logs), indicating that inhibition by even up to 2.8 logs (631-fold) cannot prevent rebound. Longitudinal analyses revealed that waning aNAb potency allows previously neutralized variants to gain rebound potential. Thus, rebound competency is a dynamic, immune-governed property defined by quantitative immunologic constraints.

Published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (predicted rank #5) · training set

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.