Shock and kill within the CNS: A promising HIV eradication approach?

The most studied HIV eradication approach is the "shock and kill" strategy, which aims to reactivate the latent reservoir by latency reversing agents (LRAs) and allowing elimination of these cells by immune-mediated clearance or viral cytopathic effects. The CNS is an anatomic compartment in which (persistent) HIV plays an important role in HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder. Restriction of the CNS by the blood-brain barrier is important for maintenance of homeostasis of the CNS microenvironment, which includes CNS-specific cell types, expression of transcription factors, and altered immune surveillance. Within the CNS predominantly myeloid cells such as microglia and perivascular macrophages are thought to be a reservoir of persistent HIV infection. Nevertheless, infection of T cells and astrocytes might also impact HIV infection in the CNS. Genetic adaptation to this microenvironment results in genetically distinct, compartmentalized viral populations with differences in transcription profiles. Because of these differences in transcription profiles, LRAs might have different effects within the CNS as compared with the periphery. Moreover, reactivation of HIV in the brain and elimination of cells within the CNS might be complex and could have detrimental consequences. Finally, independent of activity on latent HIV, LRAs themselves can have adverse neurologic effects. We provide an extensive overview of the current knowledge on compartmentalized (persistent) HIV infection in the CNS and on the "shock and kill" strategy. Subsequently, we reflect on the impact and promise of the "shock and kill" strategy on the elimination of persistent HIV in the CNS.

Longitudinal Characterization of the Mumps-Specific HLA-A2 Restricted T-Cell Response after Mumps Virus Infection.

Waning of the mumps virus (MuV)-specific humoral response after vaccination has been suggested as a cause for recent mumps outbreaks in vaccinated young adults, although it cannot explain all cases. Moreover, CD8+ T cells may play an important role in the response against MuV; however, little is known about the characteristics and dynamics of the MuV-specific CD8+ T-cell response after MuV infection. Here, we had the opportunity to follow the CD8+ T-cell response to three recently identified HLA-A2*02:01-restricted MuV-specific epitopes from 1.5 to 36 months post-MuV infection in five previously vaccinated and three unvaccinated individuals. The infection-induced CD8+ T-cell response was dominated by T cells specific for the ALDQTDIRV and LLDSSTTRV epitopes, while the response to the GLMEGQIVSV epitope was subdominant. MuV-specific CD8+ T-cell frequencies in the blood declined between 1.5 and 9 months after infection. This decline was not explained by changes in the expression of inhibitory receptors or homing markers. Despite the ongoing changes in the frequencies and phenotype of MuV-specific CD8+ T cells, TCRß analyses revealed a stable MuV-specific T-cell repertoire over time. These insights in the maintenance of the cellular response against mumps may provide hallmarks for optimizing vaccination strategies towards a long-term cellular memory response.

Autoimmune Encephalitis Resembling Dementia Syndromes.

OBJECTIVE: As autoimmune encephalitis (AIE) can resemble neurodegenerative dementia syndromes, and patients do not always present as encephalitis, this study evaluates how frequently AIE mimics dementia and provides red flags for AIE in middle-aged and older patients. METHODS: In this nationwide observational cohort study, patients with anti-leucine-rich glioma-inactivated 1 (LGI1), anti-NMDA receptor (NMDAR), anti-gamma-aminobutyric acid B receptor (GABABR), or anti-contactin-associated protein-like 2 (CASPR2) encephalitis were included. They had to meet 3 additional criteria: age ≥45 years, fulfillment of dementia criteria, and no prominent seizures early in the disease course (≤4 weeks). RESULTS: Two-hundred ninety patients had AIE, of whom 175 were 45 years or older. Sixty-seven patients (38%) fulfilled criteria for dementia without prominent seizures early in the disease course. Of them, 42 had anti-LGI1 (48%), 13 anti-NMDAR (52%), 8 anti-GABABR (22%), and 4 anti-CASPR2 (15%) encephalitis. Rapidly progressive cognitive deterioration was seen in 48 patients (76%), whereas a neurodegenerative dementia syndrome was suspected in half (n = 33). In 17 patients (27%; 16/17 anti-LGI1), subtle seizures had been overlooked. Sixteen patients (25%) had neither inflammatory changes on brain MRI nor CSF pleocytosis. At least 1 CSF biomarker, often requested when dementia was suspected, was abnormal in 27 of 44 tested patients (61%), whereas 8 had positive 14-3-3 results (19%). Most patients (84%) improved after immunotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Red flags for AIE in patients with suspected dementia are: (1) rapidly progressive cognitive decline, (2) subtle seizures, and (3) abnormalities in ancillary testing atypical for neurodegeneration. Physicians should be aware that inflammatory changes are not always present in AIE, and that biomarkers often requested when dementia was suspected (including 14-3-3) can show abnormal results. Diagnosis is essential as most patients profit from immunotherapy.