Go to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • All ...
  • Videos
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Resource and Technical Advances
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Editorials
    • Perspectives
    • Physician-Scientist Development
    • Reviews
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • In-Press Preview
  • Resource and Technical Advances
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Editorials
  • Perspectives
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Reviews
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
Determinants of the efficacy of HIV latency-reversing agents and implications for drug and treatment design
Ruian Ke, Jessica M. Conway, David M. Margolis, Alan S. Perelson
Ruian Ke, Jessica M. Conway, David M. Margolis, Alan S. Perelson
View: Text | PDF
Research Article AIDS/HIV Therapeutics

Determinants of the efficacy of HIV latency-reversing agents and implications for drug and treatment design

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

HIV eradication studies have focused on developing latency-reversing agents (LRAs). However, it is not understood how the rate of latent reservoir reduction is affected by different steps in the process of latency reversal. Furthermore, as current LRAs are host-directed, LRA treatment is likely to be intermittent to avoid host toxicities. Few careful studies of the serial effects of pulsatile LRA treatment have yet been done. This lack of clarity makes it difficult to evaluate the efficacy of candidate LRAs or predict long-term treatment outcomes. We constructed a mathematical model that describes the dynamics of latently infected cells under LRA treatment. Model analysis showed that, in addition to increasing the immune recognition and clearance of infected cells, the duration of HIV antigen expression (i.e., the period of vulnerability) plays an important role in determining the efficacy of LRAs, especially if effective clearance is achieved. Patients may benefit from pulsatile LRA exposures compared with continuous LRA exposures if the period of vulnerability is long and the clearance rate is high, both in the presence and absence of an LRA. Overall, the model framework serves as a useful tool to evaluate the efficacy and the rational design of LRAs and combination strategies.

Authors

Ruian Ke, Jessica M. Conway, David M. Margolis, Alan S. Perelson

×

Figure 4

A patient would benefit from a pulsatile regimen if an LRA induces a long period of vulnerability both on and off LRA treatment.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
A patient would benefit from a pulsatile regimen if an LRA induces a lon...
(A) Model simulation for a continuous 10-day LRA exposure followed by a rest period. The period of vulnerability is assumed to be 2 days both on and off LRA (γon = γoff = 0.5/day). (B) A model simulation for a pulsatile LRA exposure (10 dosing cycles with 1 day on LRA and 2 days off LRA). Same as in panel A, γon = γoff = 0.5/day. (C) Same pulsatile LRA exposure as in panel B, except that the period of vulnerability is much shorter, i.e., γoff = 10/day and1/γoff = 0.1 day. (D) Comparison of reservoir reduction (r.r.) between a pulsatile exposure and a continuous exposure evaluated 4 weeks after the last dose when γon = γoff. Color denotes the log10 ratio of the reservoir reduction in a 10-cycle pulsatile LRA exposure over the reduction in a 10-day continuous LRA exposure (followed by a 4-week resting period). (E) Same comparison as in panel D except that γoff is fixed at 10/day. The dashed contour line denotes parameter combinations where a pulsatile exposure and a continuous exposure achieve equal reservoir reduction. Baseline parameter values are the same as in the caption for Figure 2.

Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts