(Total Views: 522)
Posted On: 10/25/2019 8:40:42 PM
Post# of 154147
Forgot last week suprise, keeping with the x4 theme, when tested Pro 140 blocked at least one mixed strain with x4.
https://jvi.asm.org/content/75/2/579
Also, surprising pro 140 would perform better than rantes (ccl5).
Quote:
Our subtype C panel included two R5X4 viruses, one of which was potently inhibited by PRO 140
https://jvi.asm.org/content/75/2/579
Also, surprising pro 140 would perform better than rantes (ccl5).
Quote:
It was unexpected that PRO 140, a weak CCR5 antagonist, would possess breadth and potency of antiviral activity as great as or greater than those of RANTES, an agonist capable of downregulating CCR5.
Quote:
Although PRO 140 and RANTES possessed comparably broad-based antiviral activity in PBMC cultures, only PRO 140 was effective in macrophage cultures. Thus, PRO 140 was nearly equipotent at inhibiting HIV-1 replication in primary T cells and macrophages, the two principal cellular targets for virus infection in vivo. In contrast, when tested against the same virus isolates, RANTES was far less effective in blocking macrophage infection.
(0)
(0)
