Scientific American, 7/98, David Baltimore, Carole Heilman, page 78
HIV Vaccines: Prospects and Challenges
Scientists know more about HIV - the human immunodeficiency virus that causes AIDS -
than any other virus. Yet designing a vaccine able to protect against it remains as much
of a challenge today as when the virus was discovered. Part of the problem is that, unlike
the body's response to most acute viral infections, the natural immune response does not
destroy HIV This failure makes it difficult for investigators to know what type of immune
activity an effective vaccine should evoke.
At the same time, researchers have to be extremely cautious about using the preparations
that have become standard for warding off other infectious diseases-such as whole, killed
viruses or live, attenuated versions. If HIV vaccines in these forms managed to cause
infections, the consequences could be devastating. Vaccinologists therefore have had to
search for alternative ways to immunize people against HIV
Vaccines protect individuals by priming the immune system to recognize disease-causing
organisms when they are encountered. In the case of HIV, a successful vaccine should be
able to eliminate incoming virus and destroy quickly any cells that become infected.
Most vaccines activate what is called the humoral arm of the immune system, stimulating
formation of protective antibodies: molecules that mark free virus (which circulates
outside cells) for destruction. The antibodies recognize and bind to a unique part of the
infectious agent. This unique structure, called an antigen, is often a protein
on the viral surface.
Foreign antigens on an invading virus or in a vaccine activate two types of white blood
cells involved in antibody manufacture. After contacting antigens, cells known as B
lymphocytes mature and produce antibodies. In addition, helper, or CD4, T lymphocytes
direct B cells to manufacture more antibodies or to take the form of memory B cells. The
memory cells do not produce antibodies immediately but respond vigorously to subsequent
exposures. Following vaccination, the long-term production of small amounts of antibody
and the persistence of memory cells allow the body to mount a rapid defense if ever it
encounters the virus.
No vaccines have been designed specifically to stimulate the other arm of the immune
system, known as the cellular component. But many AIDS researchers are working on just
that aim because, thus far, vaccines designed to generate antibodies to HIV have failed to
elicit immunity against the strains of the virus
commonly found in infected patients. In cellular immunity, activated white
blood cells called cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CD8 T cells) multiply and cruise through the
bloodstream and tissues, searching for and eliminating virus-infected cells. Some also
become memory cells, ready to leap into action after a
later exposure to a pathogen. Unlike antibodies, cytotoxic T lymphocytes recognize
infected cells, rather than the infectious agent itself. Like B cells in the humoral arm
of the immune system, however, cytotoxic T cells are activated in part by signals from
helper T cells. In the long run, the most effective HIV vaccines may well be the ones that
stimulate both the humoral and cellular arms of the immune system, generating antibodies
and activated cytotoxic T cells.
Efforts to design an HIV vaccine that maximizes production of antibodies or stimulation of
cytotoxic T cells have been hampered by a lack of basic knowledge about how the immune
system functions. Until investigators can learn how to induce the body to generate and
maintain memory cells and cytotoxic T cells, those attempting to develop HIV vaccines will
have to rely on a certain amount of trial and error, hoping to hit on an approach that
will work.
The Antibody Approach
Vaccines that stimulate the production of protective antibodies have
proved successful for combating diseases such as poliomyelitis, measles and influenza. At
present, the most extensively tested HIV vaccine candidates contain some part of the
envelope protein (Env), the molecule that coats the surface of the virus. Because the
virus uses Env as a kind of key for gaining entry to human cells, generating antibodies
that attach to the business end of this protein should prevent HIV from binding to and
infecting cells.
The Env protein, also called gp160, is actually an association of two units: gp120, a
sugar-shrouded protein that juts out of the virus membrane and interacts with receptors on
the surface of human T lymphocytes, and gp4l, the
small protein that anchors gp120 to the membrane. Both gp120 and gp160 have been tested as
HIV vaccine candidates in human volunteers.
In tests, the proteins elicited the production of antibodies, a result that raised hopes
that they might form the basis for an effective HIV vaccine. Further, the resulting
antibodies effectively neutralized live HIV in a test tube, blocking its ability to infect
cultured human lymphocytes.
Unfortunately, the antibodies only recognized strains of HIV that were similar to those
used to generate the vaccines. The gp120 and gp160 proteins in the preparations were made
from HIV strains that had been cultivated in the laboratory. The antibodies elicited
against proteins from such lab-adapted virus strains were ineffective at neutralizing HIV
strains isolated directly from infected patients; the isolates were quite able to infect
cultured cells.
Why did the antibodies fail to neutralize the HIV obtained directly from patients? The
structure of the Env protein in laboratory-grown strains appears to be somewhat looser
than that of the surface protein in patient isolates; those in isolates are folded
tightly. Antibodies to laboratory strains of HIV may recognize parts of the Env protein
that are not normally exposed in viruses from patients, probably because the recognition
sites are buried within the more folded form of the protein. Antibodies to laboratorygrown
virus, then, would not "see" their targets on HIV isolated from patients.
Researchers are currently developing vaccines based on surface proteins prepared from
patient isolates. Such preparations may present Env in the conformation found in patients.
Yet even these vaccines may not work. The Env protein on such isolates may be very densely
packed and highly camouflaged by sugars. As a result, B cells may be unable to find many
antigens and so may produce relatively few kinds of antibodies. Such an outcome would be
consistent with the finding that people who are infected with HIV generally produce a
limited repertoire of antibodies that react with the surface of HIV
When Env binds to a cell, the protein changes its shape somewhat. A vaccine that
duplicates the conformation adopted by gp120 as it attaches to receptors on the cell
surface may succeed best at raising antibodies able to block HIV from infecting human
cells.
Individuals who are infected with HIV but remain healthy and keep viral replication in
check may offer some hope for guiding the design of an effective HIV vaccine. Some of
these long-term survivors make a very small amount of antibody, which, when isolated, can
neutralize HIV from patient isolates. Further, those antibodies can neutralize viruses
from many different patient isolates-a necessity for an AIDS vaccine that will be
effective against a broad spectrum of H1V strains. Unfortunately, even these antibodies
may not be the whole answer. Tests of cells in culture indicate that the antibodies must
be present at surprisingly high concentrations to block HIV entry into cells effectively.
Pure protein vaccines may not be the best way to stimulate antibody production: in
isolation, gp120 does not appear to have a precise conformation, and gp160 clumps into an
ineffective aggregate. To get around these difficulties, researchers are currently testing
two different vaccine strategies designed to present the Env proteins in a more natural
conformation.
One plan of attack involves using whole, killed virus particles. This disabled form of
HIV, incapable of multiplying, might present the immune system with more natural forms of
Env proteins. With a better target, B cells might produce a better quality and a higher
quantity of protective antibody.
Making a killed-virus vaccine requires a rigorous inactivation procedure, because residual
virus and even residual viral genetic material could potentially be dangerous. Harsh
treatment makes the vaccine less effective, however; the inactivation process can cause
HIV to shed its weakly attached gp120. Many researchers have therefore been moving away
from this design, although the gp120 stability problem may ultimately be solvable,.
Env proteins can also be presented to the immune system embedded in "pseudovirions
" artificial structures that re,
semble virus particles. These empty lipid shells could be made to carry nothing but gp160.
Pseudovirions would be safer than whole, killed virus, because they lack the genes that
could propagate HIV infection. Unfortunately, pseudovirions are very difficult to
manufacture and produce in a stable form. Researchers hope, however, to have sturdier
versions ready for safety trials in humans shortly
Recruiting Cytotoxic T Cells
Different vaccine strategies are required to generate activated cytotoxic T lymphocytes.
Although surface proteins or even whole, killed virus particles can elicit antibody
production, they are poor stimulants of cellular immunity. Cytotoxic T cells recognize
short pieces of foreign protein that appear on the surface of an infected cell. Infected
immune cells generate these antigenic peptides as they digest samplings of viral
proteins-surface proteins such as Env as well as the internal proteins that
drive viral reproduction and assembly. A carrier protein then escorts the protein
fragments to the cell membrane, where they are displayed' on the outside of the cell.
For an HIV vaccine to stimulate cellbased immunity, it must direct selected cells to
synthesize and display one or more peptides from the proteins normally made by the virus.
These cells would trick the body into mounting an immune response against all cells
displaying the viral peptides, including ones truly invaded by HIV
The Sabin vaccine against polio, which consists of a live poliovirus, turns out to evoke
cytotoxic T cell activity against polio-infected cells, yet it does not cause polio,
because the virus has been weakened in the laboratory by certain genetic mutations. So
far, though, no mutations have been identified that will transform HIV into a vaccine that
will be completely safe.
Investigators are, however, developing other methods for inducing cells to produce and
display HIV proteins. One approach, construction of a so-called live vector vaccine, takes
advantage of the ability of different viruses to invade cells. Researchers insert selected
HIV genes into a virus that is not harmful and then allow the benign virus, or vector, to
deliver the DNA to cells in the body. Because genes are the blueprints for proteins, the
infected cells will produce HIV proteins. These viral proteins are then chopped and
shipped to the cell surface, where they can attract the attention of wandering cytotoxic T
lymphocytes. The T cells, in turn, should multiply in response to the antigenic
stimulation and stand ready to kill any cells that actually become infected with HIV
The most extensively tested live vector vaccines are based on the canarypox virus. This
nonpathogenic relative of the smallpox virus enters human cells but is incapable of
assembling new viral particles. Researchers have engineered canarypox viruses to deliver
the genes that direct the production of Env and gp120 and a variety of nonsurface HIV
proteins, such as Gag (the core protein) and protease.
To date, the canarypox vaccines tested in humans have proved safe and have elicited modest
cytotoxic T cell-based immune responses. To stimulate a more vigorous immune response,
researchers are developing viruses that will produce greater quantities or varieties of
HIV proteins inside infected cells. Administering multiple doses of these vaccines may
help generate and maintain high numbers of activated cytotoxic T cells.
Other researchers are looking into administering viral peptides-fragments of viral
proteins-to induce an immune response. Because antigenic peptides derived from viral
proteins activate cytotoxic T lymphocytes, perhaps peptides would work as a vaccine.
Unfortunately, peptides by themselves do not elicit a strong immune response, cellular or
antibody-based, in humans. The peptides may be degraded before they reach the target
cells, or they may not be presented efficiently by the cells that encounter them. Peptide
vaccines may benefit from the development of better adjuvants, materials delivered along
with a vaccine that induce the immune system to respond more strongly.
A rather novel approach to eliciting a cellular immune response involves injecting
"naked" HIV DNA-genetic material with no proteins or lipids to deliver or
protect it. At one time, scientists believed that naked DNA would be degraded too rapidly
to be effective as a vaccine. In reality, the DNA does get into cells and can direct the
production of viral proteins. In animal studies in mice and nonhuman primates, DNA
vaccines have successfully generated cytotoxic T lymphocytes that recognize HIV proteins.
In some but not all experiments, the DNA vaccine protected animals from subsequent
infection with HIV Further studies in animals and humans are evaluating the safety and
effectiveness of this approach.
Combination Strategies
The most effective strategies-and the ones that are furthest along in
human testing-incorporate elements that will stimulate both arms of the immune response.
For example, a patient might receive a vaccine containing a canarypox virus carrying the
Env gene to stimulate cellular immunity Months later the same patient might receive pure
gp120 to elicit the generation of antibodies. This combination strategy is called a prime
boost, because the canarypox vector primes the cytotoxic T cells, and the gp120 protein
then strengthens, or boosts, the immune response by eliciting antibody production.
Early trials have demonstrated that humans vaccinated using such a combination strategy
develop both humoral and cellular immunity. But the antibodies generated have been against
laboratoryadapted HIV strains, and the cytotoxic T cell response has not been strong. 'The
next generation of combination vaccines will use canarypox viruses that carry more HIV
genes capable of producing greater quantities of viral protein, and the boost may contain
gp120 proteins made from HIV isolated from patients. Such vaccines are being produced and
may soon be ready for testing in humans.
Many researchers also continue to look into developing a live, attenuated HIV vaccine.
Because such a vaccine would closely mimic active HIV, it should theoretically be
effective at inducing cellular immunity, antibodybased immunity and perhaps other unknown
modes of protection. By systematically deleting genes critical for HIV replication,
scientists hope to develop a variant of the virus that can elicit a strong immune response
without giving rise to AIDS.
Recently a group of physicians volunteered to participate in the first clinical trial of a
live, attenuated HIV vaccine. Such a protocol would allow researchers to monitor the
volunteers' immune responses and study the long-term safety of the vaccine. The physician
volunteers believe the value of testing this approach outweighs the potential risks to
their health. Their plan remains highly controversial, and we and many other researchers
feel that attenuated HIV viruses should be more fully investigated in nonhuman primates
before any movement into human trials.
Monkeys and AIDS
Vaccines based on a live, attenuated simian immunodeficiency virus
(SIV) - a relative of HIV that infects monkeys - have been tested in macaques and other
nonhuman primates. Monkeys infected with pathogenic strains of SIV will develop an
AIDS-like syndrome. By studying this monkey model, scientists are able to test live,
attenuated vaccines for their safety and their ability to protect animals when they are
challenged by subsequent exposure to pathogenic strains of SIV Several different
attenuated SIV vaccines have proved remarkably effective at suppressing the growth of a
wild-type virus.
The basis of this immunity in macaques is unclear: animals that are effectively protected
from SIV challenge do not necessarily have high levels of neutralizing antibodies or
activated cytotoxic T lymphocytes. The protective effects may be a consequence of some
combination of antibody, helper T cell and cytotoxic T cell activity, or the effects may
derive from other aspects of immunity.
Further work is needed to determine exactly how the SIV vaccines manage to confer
protection.
Although initial studies suggested a high degree of safety for the live, attenuated SIV,
extended and expanded safety studies are beginning to show increased numbers of vaccinated
animals progressing to AIDS-like syndromes, even in the absence of exposure to wild-type
virus.
The studies are now starting to look at a greater number of animals, but the results
suggest that live, attenuated vaccines may not provide full, long-term immunity and may
even cause disease. The findings also imply that investigators should proceed with caution
before testing such vaccines in humans.
Prognosis
If the immune system in HIV infected individuals cannot wipe out the virus,
why should a vaccine that activates the same immune responses be expected to block
infection? Vaccines may give the body an immunological "head start" by priming
the immune system to attack
HIV as soon as it appears, rather than taking time to initiate a defense from scratch. By
doing so, vaccine-induced immunity may succeed in containing the virus where the naturally
infected body does not.
At present, however, there is no proof that vaccination against HIV is possible, because
no protective vaccine candidate has yet moved into Phase III trials,. which are
large-scale tests designed to evaluate effectiveness in humans. In addition, the wide
genetic variability of HIV may reduce the utility of any vaccine under development,
because HIV strains isolated from patients in different parts of the world have distinctly
different structures in their Env and, to a lesser extent, other proteins. Whether these
differences, or additional ones we have yet to appreciate, will significantly hamper
vaccine development remains uncertain.
But there is hope. As the pathogenesis of HIV infection has become better understood,
investigators have realized that if the virus can be kept at low concentrations in the
blood, an infected person may never progress to AIDS. This insight is encouraging because
it suggests that even a partially effective vaccine could be valuable in limiting the
amount of virus in patients, thus potentially reducing their infectiousness and the
symptoms they suffer.
It is unlikely that we will develop a vaccine suitable for wide-scale use in humans within
the next five years. Even if the prime-boost combination approach appears to stimulate
cellular immunity and generate good broad-spectrum antibodies, large clinical trials will
still be needed to demonstrate its value. Those trials alone will take several years. In
the meantime, researchers will continue to pursue every approach that might help the
immune system combat HIV.