Crystal engineering of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase for structure-based drug design

HIV-1 reverse transcriptase (RT) is a primary target for anti-AIDS drugs. Structures of HIV-1 RT, usually determined at ∼2.5–3.0 Å resolution, are important for understanding enzyme function and mechanisms of drug resistance in addition to being helpful in the design of RT inhibitors. Despite hundreds of attempts, it was not possible to obtain the structure of a complex of HIV-1 RT with TMC278, a nonnucleoside RT inhibitor (NNRTI) in advanced clinical trials. A systematic and iterative protein crystal engineering approach was developed to optimize RT for obtaining crystals in complexes with TMC278 and other NNRTIs that diffract X-rays to 1.8 Å resolution. Another form of engineered RT was optimized to produce a high-resolution apo-RT crystal form, reported here at 1.85 Å resolution, with a distinct RT conformation. Engineered RTs were mutagenized using a new, flexible and cost effective method called methylated overlap-extension ligation independent cloning. Our analysis suggests that reducing the solvent content, increasing lattice contacts, and stabilizing the internal low-energy conformations of RT are critical for the growth of crystals that diffract to high resolution. The new RTs enable rapid crystallization and yield high-resolution structures that are useful in designing/developing new anti-AIDS drugs

Impact or performed T-cell alloreactivity by means of donor-specific and panel of reactive T-cells (PRT) Elispot in kidney transplantation

Donor-specific (d-sp) interferon gamma enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot (d-sp ELISPOT)and Panel of reactive T-cell (PRT) ELISPOT assays have been developed to detect alloreactive memory T (Tmem) cells in order to estimate the risk of acute rejection after kidney transplantation. Adding IL15 to the PRT assay (PRT+IL15) may uncover the presence of pathogenic alloreactive CD28-Tmem. Face-to-face comparisons of these assays have not been done yet. We performed pre-transplant d-sp ELISPOT and PRT assays (±IL15, against six B-cell lines) in 168 consecutive kidney transplant recipients and evaluated the multivariable-adjusted associations with biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), de novo donor-specific antibodies (DSA), and eGFR decline over a 48-month follow-up period. D-sp ELISPOT was positive in 81 (48%) subjects, while 71 (42%) and 81 (48%) subjects displayed positive PRT and PRT+IL15, respectively.Their median [interquartile range] numerical test result was 23 [6±65], 18 [8±37], and 26 [10±45] spots/3x105 PBMCs, respectively. The number of PRT spots were weakly correlated with those of d-sp ELISPOT, but highly correlated with PRT+IL15 (rho = 0.96, P<0.001). d-sp ELISPOT, but not PRT (±IL15) was independently associated with BPAR (adjusted Odds Ratio of BPAR associated with d-sp ELISPOT positivity: 4.20 [95%CI: 1.06 to 21.73; P = 0.041]). Unlike d-sp ELISPOT, median PRT and PRT+IL15 were independently associated with higher Δ3-48month eGFR decline post-transplantation (for both assays, about -3mL/min/1.73m2 per one standard deviation unit increase in the spot number). Pre-transplant T-cell immune-monitoring using d-sp ELISPOT and PRT assays identifies kidney transplant candidates at high risk of BPAR and worse kidney allograft progression

Impact or performed T-cell alloreactivity by means of donor-specific and panel of reactive T-cells (PRT) Elispot in kidney transplantation

Donor-specific (d-sp) interferon gamma enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot (d-sp ELISPOT)and Panel of reactive T-cell (PRT) ELISPOT assays have been developed to detect alloreactive memory T (Tmem) cells in order to estimate the risk of acute rejection after kidney transplantation. Adding IL15 to the PRT assay (PRT+IL15) may uncover the presence of pathogenic alloreactive CD28-Tmem. Face-to-face comparisons of these assays have not been done yet. We performed pre-transplant d-sp ELISPOT and PRT assays (±IL15, against six B-cell lines) in 168 consecutive kidney transplant recipients and evaluated the multivariable-adjusted associations with biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), de novo donor-specific antibodies (DSA), and eGFR decline over a 48-month follow-up period. D-sp ELISPOT was positive in 81 (48%) subjects, while 71 (42%) and 81 (48%) subjects displayed positive PRT and PRT+IL15, respectively.Their median [interquartile range] numerical test result was 23 [6±65], 18 [8±37], and 26 [10±45] spots/3x105 PBMCs, respectively. The number of PRT spots were weakly correlated with those of d-sp ELISPOT, but highly correlated with PRT+IL15 (rho = 0.96, P<0.001). d-sp ELISPOT, but not PRT (±IL15) was independently associated with BPAR (adjusted Odds Ratio of BPAR associated with d-sp ELISPOT positivity: 4.20 [95%CI: 1.06 to 21.73; P = 0.041]). Unlike d-sp ELISPOT, median PRT and PRT+IL15 were independently associated with higher Δ3-48month eGFR decline post-transplantation (for both assays, about -3mL/min/1.73m2 per one standard deviation unit increase in the spot number). Pre-transplant T-cell immune-monitoring using d-sp ELISPOT and PRT assays identifies kidney transplant candidates at high risk of BPAR and worse kidney allograft progression

Impact of preformed T-cell alloreactivity by means of donor-specific and panel of reactive T cells (PRT) ELISPOT in kidney transplantation

<div><p>Donor-specific (d-sp) interferon gamma enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot (d-sp ELISPOT) and Panel of reactive T-cell (PRT) ELISPOT assays have been developed to detect alloreactive memory T (Tmem) cells in order to estimate the risk of acute rejection after kidney transplantation. Adding IL15 to the PRT assay (PRT+IL15) may uncover the presence of pathogenic alloreactive CD28^-Tmem. Face-to-face comparisons of these assays have not been done yet. We performed pre-transplant d-sp ELISPOT and PRT assays (±IL15, against six B-cell lines) in 168 consecutive kidney transplant recipients and evaluated the multivariable-adjusted associations with biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), <i>de novo</i> donor-specific antibodies (DSA), and eGFR decline over a 48-month follow-up period. D-sp ELISPOT was positive in 81 (48%) subjects, while 71 (42%) and 81 (48%) subjects displayed positive PRT and PRT+IL15, respectively. Their median [interquartile range] numerical test result was 23 [6–65], 18 [8–37], and 26 [10–45] spots/3x10⁵ PBMCs, respectively. The number of PRT spots were weakly correlated with those of d-sp ELISPOT, but highly correlated with PRT+IL15 (rho = 0.96, P<0.001). d-sp ELISPOT, but not PRT (±IL15) was independently associated with BPAR (adjusted Odds Ratio of BPAR associated with d-sp ELISPOT positivity: 4.20 [95%CI: 1.06 to 21.73; P = 0.041]). Unlike d-sp ELISPOT, median PRT and PRT+IL15 were independently associated with higher Δ3-48month eGFR decline post-transplantation (for both assays, about -3mL/min/1.73m2 per one standard deviation unit increase in the spot number). Pre-transplant T-cell immune-monitoring using d-sp ELISPOT and PRT assays identifies kidney transplant candidates at high risk of BPAR and worse kidney allograft progression.</p></div

Impact of preformed T-cell alloreactivity by means of donor-specific and panel of reactive T cells (PRT) ELISPOT in kidney transplantation - Fig 1

<p><b>Correlation between d-sp ELISPOT (as number of spots) and median (<i>i</i>.<i>e</i>., median number of spots against the six B cell lines) PRT (A) and PRT+IL-15 (B)</b> (rho = 0.18, P = 0.021 and rho = 0.19, P = 0.016, respectively). <b>Correlation between median PRT and median PRT IL-15</b> (rho = 0.96, P<0.001) (<b>C</b>).</p

A Unifying Approach for GFR Estimation: Recommendations of the NKF-ASN Task Force on Reassessing the Inclusion of Race in Diagnosing Kidney Disease

BACKGROUND: In response to a national call for re-evaluation of the use of race in clinical algorithms, the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and the American Society of Nephrology (ASN) established a Task Force to reassess inclusion of race in the estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in the United States and its implications for diagnosis and management of patients with, or at risk for, kidney diseases. PROCESS & DELIBERATIONS: The Task Force organized its activities over 10 months in phases to (1) clarify the problem and evidence regarding GFR estimating equations in the United States (described previously in an interim report), and, in this final report, (2) evaluate approaches to address use of race in GFR estimation, and (3) provide recommendations. We identified 26 approaches for the estimation of GFR that did or did not consider race and narrowed our focus, by consensus, to 5 of those approaches. We holistically evaluated each approach considering 6 attributes: assay availability and standardization; implementation; population diversity in equation development; performance compared with measured GFR; consequences to clinical care, population tracking, and research; and patient centeredness. To arrive at a unifying approach to estimate GFR, we integrated information and evidence from many sources in assessing strengths and weaknesses in attributes for each approach, recognizing the number of Black and non-Black adults affected. RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) For US adults (\u3e85% of whom have normal kidney function), we recommend immediate implementation of the CKD-EPI creatinine equation refit without the race variable in all laboratories in the United States because it does not include race in the calculation and reporting, included diversity in its development, is immediately available to all laboratories in the United States, and has acceptable performance characteristics and potential consequences that do not disproportionately affect any one group of individuals. (2) We recommend national efforts to facilitate increased, routine, and timely use of cystatin C, especially to confirm estimated GFR in adults who are at risk for or have chronic kidney disease, because combining filtration markers (creatinine and cystatin C) is more accurate and would support better clinical decisions than either marker alone. If ongoing evidence supports acceptable performance, the CKD-EPI eGFR-cystatin C (eGFR) and eGFR creatinine-cystatin C (eGFR) refit without the race variables should be adopted to provide another first-line test, in addition to confirmatory testing. (3) Research on GFR estimation with new endogenous filtration markers and on interventions to eliminate race and ethnic disparities should be encouraged and funded. An investment in science is needed for newer approaches that generate accurate, unbiased, and precise GFR measurement and estimation without the inclusion of race, and that promote health equity and do not generate disparate care. IMPLEMENTATION: This unified approach, without specification of race, should be adopted across the United States. High-priority and multistakeholder efforts should implement this solution

Median PRT and median PRT+IL5 (as number of spots) for each of the 168 patients.

<p>Dotted lines connect data belonging to the same patients. The number of spots was larger with median PRT+IL15 compared to median PRT (P<0.001 by Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test).</p

Demographic and clinical characteristics of the study population.

<p>Demographic and clinical characteristics of the study population.</p