• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of nihpaAbout Author manuscriptsSubmit a manuscriptNIH Public Access; Author Manuscript; Accepted for publication in peer reviewed journal;
Curr HIV Res. Author manuscript; available in PMC Aug 14, 2013.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC3743093
NIHMSID: NIHMS498941

Polyvalent AIDS Vaccines

Abstract

A major hurdle in the development of a global HIV-1 vaccine is viral diversity. For close to three decades, HIV vaccine development has focused on either the induction of T cell immune responses or antibody responses, and only rarely on both components. After the failure of the STEP trial, the scientific community concluded that a T cell-based vaccine would likely not be protective if the T cell immune responses were elicited against only a few dominant epitopes. Similarly, for vaccines focusing on antibody responses, one of the main criticisms after VaxGen’s failed Phase III trials was on the limited antigen breadth included in the two formulations used. The successes of polyvalent vaccine approaches against other antigenically variable pathogens encourage implementation of the same approach for the design of HIV-1 vaccines. A review of the existing HIV-1 vaccination approaches based on the polyvalent principle is included here to provide a historical perspective for the current effort of developing a polyvalent HIV-1 vaccine. Results summarized in this review provide a clear indication that the polyvalent approach is a viable one for the future development of an effective HIV vaccine.

Keywords: HIV-1, vaccine, subtypes, neutralizing antibodies, cytotoxic T lymphocytes, polyvalent vaccine

INTRODUCTION

According to the 2008 Report on the Global AIDS Epidemic by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), 33–36 million people throughout the world were living with the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) in 2007. Among many technical and political obstacles associated with the development of an effective vaccine against HIV-1, viral diversity may be considered the most challenging. HIV-1 is comprised of three distinct groups, designated as major (M), new (N), and outlier (O). In 2009, a new strain closely related to gorilla simian immunodeficiency virus (SIVgor) was discovered in a Cameroonian woman and has been designated HIV-1 Group P [1]. The predominant group, M, consists of 11 clades (i.e., subtypes A though K) and is responsible for the majority of all HIV infections throughout the world (approximately 99% of all HIV-1 infections) although some subtypes predominate in certain regions (for review, see [2]). A strain of simian immunodeficiency virus (SIVcpz) isolated from a subpopulation of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes troglodytes) is closely related to all three groups of HIV-1 (M, N, and O) [3, 4] and, therefore, is believed to be the natural reservoir for human infection [5]. In addition to well defined subtypes, there are also circulating recombinant forms (CRFs), which are hybrid HIV-1 viruses that contain genetic material from different clades, further increasing the diversity and complexity of HIV-1 infection. The development of a vaccine to encompass such viral diversity is a major hurdle in AIDS vaccine research.

For close to three decades, HIV vaccine development has focused on either the induction of T cell immune responses [6, 7] or antibody responses [810], and only rarely on both components [11]. After the failure of the STEP trial, the scientific community concluded that a T cell-based vaccine would likely not be protective if the T cell immune responses were elicited against only a few dominant epitopes [1215]. Similarly, for vaccines focusing on antibody responses, one of the main criticisms after VaxGen’s failed Phase III trials was on the limited antigen breadth included in the two formulations used (either two subtype B envelope (Env) antigens for the US-based trial, or one subtype B and one subtype E Env antigen for the Thailand-based trial).

One main strategy to overcome the high viral diversity is to develop an HIV antigen that can elicit broadly protective antibodies. The leading hypothesis in more than two decades suggests that an Env antigen with a trimer structure is the ideal antigen conformation that can mimic Env found on the surface of HIV-1 viral particles [1619]. The early studies of several neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) (b12, 2G12, 2F5 and 4E10) from HIV-1 infected patients [2025] and the more recent discovery of additional mAbs with even broader neutralizing activities (PG9/PG16 and VRC1) [2628] have indicated that there may be some common Env structures across very different HIV-1 isolates to render the viruses susceptible to neutralization, and thus, making it feasible to develop one HIV vaccine effective against many diverse strains.

However, such “antigenicity” analysis has not been translated into the design of optimal Env antigens for “immunogenicity” studies. Despite the success of neutralizing mAbs, there has been no real progress in inducing broadly neutralizing antibody responses through active immunization in animal or human hosts with structurally “optimized” immunogens. Surprisingly, in the recently reported RV144 clinical trial conducted in Thailand, which employed a prime immunization with recombinant canarypox vector vaccine vCP1521 (HIV-1 antigens expressed by ALVAC vector) plus booster injections of a bivalent recombinant gp120 subunit vaccine AIDSVAX B/E, a 31% decrease in HIV-1 infection was observed among those that received the vaccine compared to placebo [29]. Because this protection was identified in the early phase of HIV-1 infection, it is suspected that antibody responses may have played an important role [30, 31], which would challenge the prevailing concept that a gp120 monomer is not capable of eliciting protective antibody responses [32, 33]. At the same time, additional data from several groups have independently demonstrated that gp120 antigens, if delivered in a heterologous prime-boost format, may be able to elicit neutralizing antibodies against primary HIV-1 isolates that are not sensitive to neutralization [3436]. Furthermore, the breadth of antibody responses can be significantly improved if multiple gp120 antigens are delivered in a “polyvalent formulation” [37]. Therefore, polyvalent Env vaccines may offer an alternative, and potentially complementary, approach to the long but unsuccessful effort of identifying an optimal Env antigen for the development of an effective AIDS vaccine to cover the broad diversity of HIV-1 isolates. The current review will highlight the key data in this area and outline the opportunities and challenges associated with the development of polyvalent HIV vaccines.

SUCCESS OF POLYVALENT VACCINES AGAINST OTHER PATHOGENS

The development and use of polyvalent vaccine strategies have been observed throughout the history of modern vaccinology. In the early 1900s, development of a polio vaccine was initially unsuccessful. It was later shown that the etiological agent of poliomyelitis could be any one of three enteroviruses [38]. Two effective vaccine formulations were subsequently developed. The inactivated vaccine, formulated by mixing the three viral strains, was developed by Jonas Salk in 1952. Another was developed by Albert Sabin in 1957 and provided the advantages of a live, polyvalent attenuated oral vaccine [39] to cover major enteroviruses that are responsible for the outbreak of polio.

Polyvalent vaccines have also been successful against other viruses with more frequent mutations, such as the influenza virus. There are three types of influenza virus - Types A, B, and C. Influenza virus Types A and B have been responsible for epidemic human diseases whereas Type A viruses have been responsible for several past human pandemics. Vaccines against influenza virus incorporate new viral strains in each year’s formulation based on the general design of trivalent vaccines: two Type A viruses (from H1N1 and H3N2), and a Type B virus. This polyvalent design can be used for both inactivated and live-attenuated forms of influenza vaccines. While this vaccination strategy has proven effective against seasonal influenza, it is still possible to further improve the coverage by adding another influenza vaccine component to cover new emerging viral strains. For example, with more infections with Type B viruses identified in recent years, there has been discussion on whether it is necessary to include a second Type B vaccine as the fourth component of expanded polyvalent influenza vaccines. Similarly, in the case of flu pandemics with avian or swine source viruses, a supplemental influenza vaccine can be developed and used in large scale in addition to routine seasonal influenza vaccines, such as during the 2009 outbreak of a new H1N1 swine origin virus [40, 41]. This supplement component proves the utility and flexibility of the polyvalent influenza vaccine strategy.

Polyvalent vaccines against bacterial infections, such as pneumococcus, have undergone various formulation changes throughout history including a 23-valent formulation as a vaccine with the highest number of antigens included in one formulation. The components of this 23-valent vaccine formulation were chosen to represent the majority of the individual serotypes that cause invasive pneumococcal infections in both developed and developing countries [42, 43] and a single inoculation results in IgM and IgG antibodies within a short period of time. However, since the 23-valent vaccine formulation is T cell-independent, it is less immunogenic in infants and in immunocompromised individuals and additional efforts have been made to convert the polysaccharide antigens to T cell-dependent antigens, leading to the development of a 7-valent conjugate pneumococcal vaccine licensed for clinical use to infants and young children since 2000 [44]. An improved 13-valent version has since been developed to provide coverage for children two months to five years against six additional strains of pneumococcal bacteria [45].

More recently, a quadravalent vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV) has been developed against HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18 [4648]. The development of this vaccine has demonstrated two very important principles in vaccination technology. The first being that this 4-valent vaccine was able to broaden the scope of immune responses against four circulating strains of HPV and the second being that it afforded protection against two diseases - cervical cancer and genital warts, a new expansion on the concept of polyvalent vaccines.

The development of polyvalent vaccines against these very complicated viral and bacterial diseases provides a valuable lesson to researchers working in the field of HIV-1 vaccine development.

ARGUMENT FOR THE USE OF THE POLYVALENT STRATEGY FOR HIV-1 VACCINE DEVELOPMENT

A major challenge in developing an HIV vaccine is to identify immunogens and delivery methods that elicit balanced antibody and cell-mediated immunity against highly variant HIV primary isolates given that high titer neutralizing antibodies and broad cellular immunity are inversely correlated with HIV-1 disease progression in humans [49, 50]. The diversity of HIV-1 subtypes and the high frequency of viral mutations has almost eliminated the possibility of developing a vaccine based on a single natural HIV-1 Env antigen [51]. Significant effort has been made in various attempts to identify a unique Env structure that would induce broadly neutralizing antibodies against a wide array of HIV-1 isolates, such as the principal neutralizing domain (PND) based on the V3 loop [52], antigen sequence or structures of broadly neutralizing monoclonal antibodies [23, 24, 5357], induction of fusion intermediates [58], and consensus env sequences [59, 60]. However, these attempts have not been successful because these approaches were not effective in eliciting broadly reactive neutralizing antibodies despite such ideas being very attractive in theory.

Furthermore, the development of polyvalent vaccines are more critical given the various mechanisms used by HIV to evade the host immune system, such as cytotoxic effects toward virus-specific T helper cells, escape from neutralizing antibodies and cytotoxic T lymphocytes, epitope masking through shielding by variable loops and glycosylation, downregulation of Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC), and low-grade chronic infection through latently-infected cells [61]. An effective vaccine against HIV will likely need to circumvent these escape mechanisms [61]. The multifaceted nature of polyvalent vaccines (incorporating both T and B cell antigens) may be one solution to control HIV infection.

Facing the failure of eliciting broad antibody responses, researchers have tried to use different viral vectors to develop T cell immune responses with the hope that this strategy may overcome the diversity of viruses [6274]. This strategy has been tested against various HIV-1 antigens (i.e., Gag, Pol, Tat, or Vpu) [73, 7578] as a means to expand the coverage of HIV-1-directed vaccines. Unfortunately, most T cell alone vaccines could not completely protect non-human primates against simian human immunodeficiency viruses (SHIV) or simian immunodeficiency (SIV) challenges when sterilizing immunity is taken as the primary endpoint; however, many were able to produce a significant reduction in viremia and did provide protection from disease progression [65, 66, 71, 76, 77]. Gag-based T cell vaccines were able to achieve protection in non-human primates but one leading clinical trial of this strategy, the STEP trial, failed to elicit protection in humans, presumably due to limited numbers of CD8+ T cell epitopes elicited in individual volunteers by this vaccine [6, 7]. HIV-1 diversity continues to pose a significant threat to the development of an efficacious AIDS vaccine.

The idea of developing a polyvalent vaccine against HIV-1 has not been popular. Many HIV vaccine researchers will automatically rule out this strategy based on the concern that HIV-1, being a retrovirus, will continuously produce mutated viruses within infected individuals and in an endemic region, therefore, it will be difficult to protect against such rapid and broad viral sequence changes. While it is true that viral gene sequence complexity for HIV-1 over the past two decades is greater than that observed for other viruses, such as influenza, over a longer time frame, several studies have suggested the promising potential of a polyvalent approach for HIV vaccine development: 1) a combination of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies derived from several different sources has been shown to provide broad neutralizing activities in vitro and in vivo against heterologous isolates (for review, see [79]); 2) given that HIV protein structures are constrained by function, there exists some restriction in structural diversity [8082]; 3) although superinfection does occur for HIV-1, it is rare and patients that have been infected with HIV are often less susceptible to another HIV-1 infection [83]. Similarly macaques that have been infected with SIV or SHIV are protected from challenges with heterologous viruses [84, 85].

In fact, strategies of envelope selection for polyvalent Env vaccines have been directly or indirectly explored in the previous studies including the use of representatives from multiple clades, natural escape mutant viruses, and antigenically distinct envelope proteins as defined by antibody-antigen interaction and antibody-virus neutralization studies [8689].

Initial research in primates demonstrated that although live-attenuated SIV vaccines could offer protection against subsequent infection in nonhuman primates [9092], protection was observed only during challenge with the homologous virus and not when a heterologous challenge virus was used. Cho et al. subsequently showed that a recombinant vaccinia prime and subunit protein boost approach using a cocktail of HIV-1 Env glycoproteins was capable of eliciting neutralizing antibody responses against three or more viral strains of HIV [93]. However, the breadth of neutralization was still limited to the strains that were included in the vaccine formulation and vaccination did not afford protection from a heterologous SHIV challenge. A different type of polyvalent vaccine based on macaque simian immunodeficiency virus (SIVmac) regulatory genes, rev, tat, and nef, was demonstrated to be immunogenic in SIVmac-251-infected macaques as evidenced by an expansion of virus-specific CD8+ T cell virus responses but no protection was studied in this report [94]. Given the setback of the STEP trial, polyvalent vaccines with a focus on eliciting broad protective antibody responses are clearly indicated.

STUDIES WITH POLYVALENT ENV VACCINE FORMULATIONS

The discovery of the DNA-based vaccination approach has greatly expanded the technical flexibility of testing polyvalent HIV vaccines employing multiple HIV-1 Env antigens with sequence diversity. Candidate polyvalent Env formulations can be tested directly as DNA vaccines with env gene inserts to avoid the more complicated process of producing recombinant Env proteins. Several Env-expressing DNA vaccines can be mixed and delivered in one formulation without concern of any potential interactions among different recombinant Env protein antigens. Furthermore, a protein boost component can be added to further enhance the immunogenicity of polyvalent Env-expressing DNA vaccines.

DNA-based polyvalent vaccines composed of Env either from clades A, B, and C [95, 96] combined with homologous protein boost [97] or from clades A, B, C, D, and E combined with an homologous gp120 protein boost [37] have been tested for their ability to induce broad neutralizing antibody responses in guinea pigs, rabbits, and rhesus macaques with considerable success compared to immunization with a monovalent vaccine. More specifically, in this later study, it was shown that rabbit sera immunized with the DNA prime plus protein boosting approach, but not DNA vaccine alone or Env protein alone, were capable of neutralizing seven out of 10 viruses in a single round infection neutralization assay against a panel of 10 primary HIV-1 isolates of subtypes A, B, C, and E, and 12 out of 14 viruses in a PhenoSense assay against a panel of 12 pseudoviruses expressing primary HIV-1 Env antigens from subtypes A, B, C, D, and E. More importantly, sera immunized with the polyvalent Env antigens were able to neutralize a significantly higher percentage of viruses than the sera immunized with the monovalent antigens [37].

Additional studies have shown that immunization with a DNA vaccine encoding env genes from multiple clades of HIV-1 and a gag gene from a single clade of HIV-1, in combination with a gp120 protein boost homologous to the DNA vaccine, elicited neutralizing antibodies against homologous [98, 99] and, to a lesser extent, heterologous HIV-1 isolates, including Env from clade A, which was not present in the vaccine formulation [100]. Furthermore, both Env- and Gag-specific cell-mediated immune responses were also observed and immunization with this vaccine platform was protective against a rectal challenge with a SHIV isolate encoding HIV-1Ba-L env gene. Sterilizing immunity was achieved in four out of six immunized monkeys while all seven animals in the control group which did not receive any vaccines had high levels of viral infection after SHIV challenge. Further studies showed that this vaccine formulation induced Env-specific cellular immune responses and humoral immune responses in rhesus macaques and that in both macaques and mice, these effects were further augmented with administration of a protein boost [101]. Further dissection of cell-mediated responses showed that both CD8+ CTL and CD4+ T-helper cells were important contributors of the immune response.

Based on the results of the aforementioned preclinical trials, which employed a DNA vaccine encoding env genes from multiple clades of HIV-1 and a gag gene from a single clade of HIV-1 in combination with a gp120 protein boost homologous to the DNA vaccine, a Phase I clinical trial was carried out to determine the immunogenicity and safety of this multi-gene, polyvalent formulation in humans [102, 103]. Results from this clinical study demonstrated the immunogenicity of this vaccination platform as evidenced by robust cross-subtype HIV-1-specific T cell responses and high titer serum antibody responses that recognized a wide range of primary HIV-1 Env antigens and neutralized pseudotyped viruses that expressed the randomly selected primary Env antigens from HIV-1 subtypes A to E [11]. Approximately 60% of the volunteers in this study achieved such neutralizing activities against 50%–100% viruses in this 14-pseudotyped virus panel, while another 30% volunteers had neutralizing antibodies against 25–50% psudotyped viruses. This finding with human immune sera is highly significant because it argues that at least a good percentage of primary HIV-1 isolates can be neutralized with by a five-valent Env vaccine formulation.

Recently, a more detailed analysis was conducted in rabbits to compare the relative immunogenicity between a monovalent DNA prime + monovalent protein boost and a monovalent DNA prime + polyvalent protein boost [104]. It was demonstrated that the use of a polyvalent protein boost was more effective than a monovalent protein boost in eliciting broader neutralizing activities against a panel of Tier 2 primary Env-based pseudotyped viruses. A similar finding was observed with V3 scaffold immunogens as the boost following DNA prime immunizations [105]. The V3 epitope is a well-known target on the HIV-1 Env antigen for the induction of neutralizing antibody (NAb) responses [89, 106]. V3-scaffold chimeric proteins were developed to fuse a V3 peptide with an unrelated protein to focus the body’s antibody response to the V3 epitope. This fusion protein was effective in boosting HIV-1-specific neutralizing activities in rabbits primed with a gp120 DNA vaccine [107]. Compared to a single V3-scaffold fusion protein, a mixture of bi-valent V3-scaffold proteins, as a boost formulation following a monovalent gp120 DNA prime, provided better breadth and/or potency against V3 chimeric pseudotyped viruses, primary isolates from clades A, A/G, and B, and Tier 1 and Tier 2 viruses from clades B and C [105].

The use of the polyvalent concept purely for T cell immune responses has been rare but in one study, HIV-specific induction of cellular immunity has also been observed following immunization with polyvalent clade A, B, and C Env-based DNA vaccines; a response that was not observed following immunization with the monovalent vaccine formulation [95, 97]. A new way of producing polyvalent T cell-based vaccines is the design of mosaic vaccines: antigens comprised of sets of artificial proteins assembled from fragments of natural sequences via a computational optimization method [108]. This approach was subsequently shown effective in expanded coverage against known T cell epitopes, when compared with the use of natural HIV antigens in non-human primate models [109, 110]. It is yet to be seen whether this approach is also immunogenic in humans and, ultimately, whether improved breadth of CD8+ T cell epitopes can lead to protection against HIV-1 infection in efficacy studies.

FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF POLYVALENT AIDS VACCINES

While studies on the use of polyvalent formulations for AIDS vaccine development are still very limited, data collected from the above studies provide an important indication that there may be some unrecognized merit in the polyvalent approach. A lack of animal models to directly test protection efficacy against HIV-1 infection makes proving the utility of polyvalent AIDS vaccines difficult and studies may have to rely on biomarkers to measure its relative effectiveness, until a more advanced clinical efficacy trial can be conducted. Therefore, additional basic studies are needed to ask the following questions:

First, can primary Env antigens be grouped based on their neutralizing sensitivities or specificities to neutralizing antibodies/sera. Binley et al. showed that primary HIV-1 can be divided into five major groups based on their susceptibility to various neutralizing antibodies [111]. One question that is prompted from this study relates to the structural basis for such grouping and gaining insight into this aspect may further guide the development of representative Env antigens targeting each of these groups.

Second, with the discovery of new neutralizing mAbs targeting different epitopes [2628], it will be very important for future studies to determine if mixing two or more of such mAb (i.e. mAbs that target different neutralizing epitopes) can achieve any synergistic effect against HIV-1, as measured by the breadth or potency of neutralizing antibody responses.

Third, the issue of how to group available primary Env antigens (from their genetic sequences) based on the information learned from the above two questions arises.

While such grouping may not be obvious based on the traditional primary sequences of proteins, hopefully, with more information from the above studies, algorithms can be developed to identify the subtle structure common ground for such groups.

Finally, more polyvalent Env small animal studies should be conducted to dissect any potential differences in antibody responses elicited by different individual Env antigens. Although it is possible to start this screening process in a random fashion, the results from the suggested neutralizing grouping studies and the more rational selection of Env with unique sequence of structural signatures may be used as studies advance. At the end, we can learn if one polyvalent formulation is more effective than the other polyvalent formulation when they are measured against different populations of HIV-1 isolates in the world.

T cell-based polyvalent vaccines are just being explored and it is a powerful approach because it is supported by sophisticated bioinformatics analysis. It will certainly provide an important supplemental approach to the traditional antibody-based polyvalent vaccination approach.

While the above studies can be done in small animals or in selected non-human primates to prove the general principles of polyvalent formulations for AIDS vaccine development, it is equally important to combine human immunogenicity studies to test any important information learned from animal studies. Such human studies do not need to be designed to test the efficacy of such formulations. Instead, analysis on the biological activities of human sera and lymphocytes either between volunteers receiving a monovalent and a polyvalent Env formulation, or between those receiving different polyvalent Env formulations, will greatly expand our understanding on the potential of such approaches.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported in part by NIH grants AI065250, AI082274, AI082676, & AI087191.

ABBREVIATIONS

AIDS
Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome
CRFs
Circulating recombinant forms
Env
Envelope
HIV-1
Human immunodeficiency virus-1
HPV
Human papillomavirus
mAbs
Monoclonal antibodies
Nab
Neutralizing antibody
PND
Principal neutralizing domain
SHIV
Simian human immunodeficiency virus
SIV
Simian immunodeficiency virus
SIVgor
Gorilla simian immunodeficiency virus
SIVmac
Macaque simian immunodeficiency virus

REFERENCES

1. Plantier J-C, Leoz M, Dickerson JE, et al. A new human immunodeficiency virus derived from gorillas. Nat Med. 2009;15(8):871–872. [PubMed]
2. Arien KK, Vanham G, Arts EJ. Is HIV-1 evolving to a less virulent form in humans? Nat Rev Micro. 2007;5(2):141–151. [PubMed]
3. Peeters M, Honoré Cc, Huet T, et al. Isolation and partial characterization of an HIV-related virus occurring naturally in chimpanzees in Gabon. Aids. 1989;3(10):625–630. [PubMed]
4. Huet T, Cheynier R, Meyerhans A, Roelants G, Wain-Hobson S. Genetic organization of a chimpanzee lentivirus related to HIV-1. Nature. 1990;345(6273):356–359. [PubMed]
5. Gao F, Bailes E, Robertson DL, et al. Origin of HIV-1 in the chimpanzee Pan troglodytes troglodytes. Nature. 1999;397(6718):436–441. [PubMed]
6. Buchbinder SP, Mehrotra DV, Duerr A, et al. Efficacy assessment of a cell-mediated immunity HIV-1 vaccine (the Step Study): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, test-of-concept trial. Lancet. 2008;372(9653):1881–1893. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
7. HVTN. HIV Vaccine Trials Network Conference. 2007 2007.
8. Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Trial of a Recombinant Glycoprotein 120 Vaccine to Prevent HIV-1 Infection. J Infect Dis. 2005;191(5):654–665. [PubMed]
9. Pitisuttithum P, Gilbert P, Gurwith M, et al. Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo Controlled Efficacy Trial of a Bivalent Recombinant Glycoprotein 120 HIV-1 Vaccine among Injection Drug Users in Bangkok, Thailand. J Infect Dis. 2006;194(12):1661–1671. [PubMed]
10. VaxGen Announces Results of its Phase III HIV Vaccine Trial in Thailand: Vaccine Fails to Meet Endpoints. 2003
11. Wang S, Kennedy JS, West K, et al. Cross-subtype antibody and cellular immune responses induced by a polyvalent DNA primeprotein boost HIV-1 vaccine in healthy human volunteers. Vaccine. 2008;26(8):1098–1110. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
12. Giuseppe P. HIV-1 T-cell vaccines: evaluating the next step. LANINF. 2008;8(2):82–83. [PubMed]
13. Barouch DH, Korber B. HIV-1 Vaccine Development After STEP. Ann Rev Med. 2010;61(1):153–167. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
14. Hanke T. STEP trial and HIV-1 vaccines inducing T-cell responses. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2008;7(3):303–309. [PubMed]
15. Iaccino E, Schiavone M, Fiume G, Quinto I, Scala G. The aftermath of the Merck's HIV vaccine trial. Retrovirology. 2008;5(1):56. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
16. Yang X, Florin L, Farzan M, et al. Modifications that stabilize human immunodeficiency virus envelope glycoprotein trimers in solution. J Virol. 2000;74(10):4746–4754. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
17. Sundling C, Forsell MN, O'Dell S, et al. Soluble HIV-1 Env trimers in adjuvant elicit potent and diverse functional B cell responses in primates. J Exp Med. 2010;207(9):2003–2017. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
18. Nkolola JP, Peng H, Settembre EC, et al. Breadth of neutralizing antibodies elicited by stable, homogeneous clade A and clade C HIV-1 gp140 envelope trimers in guinea pigs. J Virol. 2010;84(7):3270–3279. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
19. Forsell MN, Schief WR, Wyatt RT. Immunogenicity of HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein oligomers. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2009;4(5):380–387. [PubMed]
20. Trkola A, Purtscher M, Muster T, et al. Human monoclonal antibody 2G12 defines a distinctive neutralization epitope on the gp120 glycoprotein of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Virol. 1996;70(2):1100–1108. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
21. Burton DR, Pyati J, Koduri R, et al. Efficient neutralization of primary isolates of HIV-1 by a recombinant human monoclonal antibody. Science. 1994;266(5187):1024–1027. [PubMed]
22. Roben P, Moore JP, Thali M, et al. Recognition properties of a panel of human recombinant Fab fragments to the CD4 binding site of gp120 that show differing abilities to neutralize human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Virol. 1994;68(8):4821–4828. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
23. Purtscher M, Trkola A, Gruber G, et al. A broadly neutralizing human monoclonal antibody against gp41 of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 1994;10(12):1651–1658. [PubMed]
24. Zwick MB, Labrijn AF, Wang M, et al. Broadly neutralizingantibodies targeted to the membrane-proximal external region of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 glycoprotein gp41. J Virol. 2001;75(22):10892–10905. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
25. Chen YH, Dierich MP. Identification of a second site in HIV-1 gp41 mediating binding to cells. Immunol Lett. 1996;52(2–3):153–156. [PubMed]
26. Wu X, Yang Z-Y, Li Y, et al. Rational Design of Envelope Identifies Broadly Neutralizing Human Monoclonal Antibodies to HIV-1. Science. 2010;329(5993):856–861. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
27. Zhou T, Georgiev I, Wu X, et al. Structural Basis for Broad and Potent Neutralization of HIV-1 by Antibody VRC01. Science. 2010;329(5993):811–817. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
28. Walker LM, Phogat SK, Chan-Hui P-Y, et al. Broad and Potent Neutralizing Antibodies from an African Donor Reveal a New HIV-1 Vaccine Target. Science. 2009;326(5950):285–289. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
29. Rerks-Ngarm S, Pitisuttithum P, Nitayaphan S, et al. Vaccination with ALVAC and AIDSVAX to Prevent HIV-1 Infection in Thailand. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(23):2209–2220. [PubMed]
30. Dorner T, Radbruch A. Antibodies and B cell memory in viral immunity. Immunity. 2007;27(3):384–392. [PubMed]
31. Walker LM, Burton DR. Rational antibody-based HIV-1 vaccine design: current approaches and future directions. Curr Opin Immunol. 2010;22(3):358–366. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
32. Flynn NM, Forthal DN, Harro CD, et al. Placebo-controlled phase 3 trial of a recombinant glycoprotein 120 vaccine to prevent HIV-1 infection. J Infect Dis. 2005;191(5):654–665. [PubMed]
33. Gilbert PB, Peterson ML, Follmann D, et al. Correlation between immunologic responses to a recombinant glycoprotein 120 vaccine and incidence of HIV-1 infection in a phase 3 HIV-1 preventive vaccine trial. J Infect Dis. 2005;191(5):666–677. [PubMed]
34. Wang S, Arthos J, Lawrence JM, et al. Enhanced immunogenicity of gp120 protein when combined with recombinant DNA priming to generate antibodies that neutralize the JR-FL primary isolate of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Virol. 2005;79(12):7933–7937. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
35. Law M, Cardoso RM, Wilson IA, Burton DR. Antigenic and immunogenic study of membrane-proximal external region-grafted gp120 antigens by a DNA prime-protein boost immunization strategy. J Virol. 2007;81(8):4272–4285. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
36. Beddows S, Schulke N, Kirschner M, et al. Evaluating the immunogenicity of a disulfide-stabilized, cleaved, trimeric form of the envelope glycoprotein complex of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Virol. 2005;79(14):8812–8827. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
37. Wang S, Pal R, Mascola JR, et al. Polyvalent HIV-1 Env vaccine formulations delivered by the DNA priming plus protein boosting approach are effective in generating neutralizing antibodies against primary human immunodeficiency virus type 1 isolates from subtypes A, B, C, D and E. Virology. 2006;350(1):34–47. [PubMed]
38. Sutter RW, Kew OM, Cochi SL. Polio. In: Plotkin SA, Orenstein WA, editors. Vaccines. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2004. pp. 651–705.
39. Myaux JA, Unicomb L, Besser RE, et al. Effect of diarrhea on the humoral response to oral polio vaccination. Pedatr Infect Dis J. 1996;15:204. [PubMed]
40. Clark TW, Pareek M, Hoschler K, et al. Trial of 2009 Influenza A (H1N1) Monovalent MF59-Adjuvanted Vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(25):2424–2435. [PubMed]
41. Greenberg ME, Lai MH, Hartel GF, et al. Response to a Monovalent 2009 Influenza A (H1N1) Vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(25):2405–2413. [PubMed]
42. Eskola J, Black S, Shinwwefield H. Pneumococcus. In: Plotkin SA, Orenstein WA, editors. Vaccines. Philadelphia: Elseview; 2004. pp. 589–624.
43. Butler JC, Breiman RF, Lipman HB, Hofmann J, Facklam RR. Serotype distribution of Streptococcus pneumoniae infections among preschool children in the United States, 1978–1994: implications for development of a conjugate vaccine. J Infect Dis. 1995;171(4):885–889. [PubMed]
44. United States Department of Health and Human Services. First pneumococcal vaccine approved for infants and toddlers. 2000 Feb 17;
45. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Licensure of a 13-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV13) and Recommendations for Use Among Children --- Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) 2010 Mar 12; 2010. [PubMed]
46. Garland SM, Hernandez-Avila M, Wheeler CM, et al. Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent anogenital diseases. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(19):1928–1943. [PubMed]
47. Munoz N, Manalastas R, Jr, Pitisuttithum P, et al. Safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, 18) recombinant vaccine in women aged 24–45 years: a randomised, double-blind trial. Lancet. 2009;373(9679):1949–1957. [PubMed]
48. Future II Study Group. Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent high-grade cervical lesions. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(19):1915–1927. [PubMed]
49. Pantaleo G, Fauci AS. Immunopathogenesis of HIV infection. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1996;50:825–854. [PubMed]
50. Soudeyns H, Pantaleo G. The moving target: mechanisms of HIV persistence during primary infection. Immunol Today. 1999;20(10):446–450. [PubMed]
51. Wei X, Decker JM, Wang S, et al. Antibody neutralization and escape by HIV-1. Nature. 2003;422(6929):307–312. [PubMed]
52. Javaherian K, Langlois AJ, LaRosa GJ, et al. Broadly neutralizing antibodies elicited by the hypervariable neutralizing determinant of HIV-1. Science. 1990;250(4987):1590–1593. [PubMed]
53. Burton DR, Stanfield RL, Wilson IA. Antibody vs HIV in a clash of evolutionary titans. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102(42):14943–14948. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
54. Conley AJ, Kessler JA, 2nd, Boots LJ, et al. Neutralization of divergent human immunodeficiency virus type 1 variants and primary isolates by IAM-41-2F5, an anti-gp41 human monoclonal antibody. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1994;91(8):3348–3352. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
55. Moulard M, Phogat SK, Shu Y, et al. Broadly cross-reactive HIV-1-neutralizing human monoclonal Fab selected for binding to gp120-CD4-CCR5 complexes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;99(10):6913–6918. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
56. Muster T, Guinea R, Trkola A, et al. Cross-neutralizing activity against divergent human immunodeficiency virus type 1 isolates induced by the gp41 sequence ELDKWAS. J Virol. 1994;68(6):4031–4034. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
57. Scanlan CN, Pantophlet R, Wormald MR, et al. The broadly neutralizing anti-human immunodeficiency virus type 1 antibody 2G12 recognizes a cluster of alpha1-->2 mannose residues on the outer face of gp120. J Virol. 2002;76(14):7306–7321. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
58. LaCasse RA, Follis KE, Trahey M, et al. Fusion-competent vaccines: broad neutralization of primary isolates of HIV. Science. 1999;283(5400):357–362. [PubMed]
59. Gaschen B, Taylor J, Yusim K, et al. Diversity considerations in HIV-1 vaccine selection. Science. 2002;296(5577):2354–2360. [PubMed]
60. Gao F, Chen Y, Levy DN, et al. Unselected mutations in the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 genome are mostly nonsynonymous and often deleterious. J Virol. 2004;78(5):2426–2433. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
61. Johnson WE, Desrosiers RC. VIRAL PERSISTENCE: HIV's Strategies of Immune System Evasion. Ann Rev Med. 2002;53(1):499–518. [PubMed]
62. Amara RR, Villinger F, Altman JD, et al. Control of a mucosal challenge and prevention of AIDS by a multiprotein DNA/MVA vaccine. Science. 2001;292(5514):69–74. [PubMed]
63. Ferrari G, Kostyu DD, Cox J, et al. Identification of Highly Conserved and Broadly Cross-Reactive HIV Type 1 Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte Epitopes as Candidate Immunogens for Inclusion in Mycobacterium bovis BCG-Vectored HIV Vaccines. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2000;16(14):1433–1443. [PubMed]
64. Hanke T, Barnfield C, Wee EGT, et al. Construction and immunogenicity in a prime-boost regimen of a Semliki Forest virus-vectored experimental HIV clade A vaccine. J Gen Virol. 2003;84(2):361–368. [PubMed]
65. Berglund P, Quesada-Rolander M, Putkonen P, et al. Outcome of immunization of cynomolgus monkeys with recombinant Semliki Forest virus encoding human immunodeficiency virus type 1 envelope protein and challenge with a high dose of SHIV-4 virus. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 1997;13(17):1487–1495. [PubMed]
66. Davis NL, Ande W, Elizabeth R, et al. Alphavirus Replicon Particles as Candidate HIV Vaccines. IUBMB Life. 2002;53(4–5):209–211. [PubMed]
67. Lubeck MD, Natuk RJ, Chengalvala M, et al. Immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus-human immunodeficiency virus vaccines in chimpanzees following intranasal administration. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 1994;10(11):1443–1449. [PubMed]
68. Xin K-Q, Urabe M, Yang J, et al. A Novel Recombinant Adeno-Associated Virus Vaccine Induces a Long-Term Humoral Immune Response to Human Immunodeficiency Virus. Human Gene Therapy. 2001;12(9):1047–1061. [PubMed]
69. Clements-Mann ML, Weinhold K, Matthews TJ, et al. Immune responses to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 induced by canarypox expressing HIV-1MN gp120, HIV-1SF2 recombinant gp120 or both vaccines in seronegative adults NIAID AIDS Vaccine Evaluation Group. J Infect Dis. 1998;177(5):1230–1246. [PubMed]
70. Pialoux G, Excler JL, Riviere Y, et al. A prime-boost approach to HIV preventive vaccine using a recombinant canarypox virus expressing glycoprotein 160 (MN) followed by a recombinant glycoprotein 160 (MN/LAI) The AGIS Group, and l'Agence Nationale de Recherche sur le SIDA. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 1995;11(3):373–381. [PubMed]
71. Kent SJ, Zhao A, Best SJ, et al. Enhanced T-cell immunogenicity and protective efficacy of a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 vaccine regimen consisting of consecutive priming with DNA and boosting with recombinant fowlpox virus. J Virol. 1998;72(12):10180–10188. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
72. Stubbs AC, Martin KS, Coeshott C, et al. Whole recombinant yeast vaccine activates dendritic cells and elicits protective cell-mediated immunity. Nat Med. 2001;7(5):625–629. [PubMed]
73. Haglund K, Leiner I, Kerksiek K, et al. Robust Recall and Long-Term Memory T-Cell Responses Induced by Prime-Boost Regimens with Heterologous Live Viral Vectors Expressing Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Gag and Env Proteins. J Virol. 2002;76(15):7506–7517. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
74. Peet NPJDBS, et al. The Immune Response to HIV gp120 Induced by Nucleic Acid Immunization (NAI)a. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1995;772:257–260. (DNA Vaccines: A New Era in Vaccinology) [PubMed]
75. McGettigan JP, Naper K, Orenstein J, et al. Functional Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 (HIV-1) Gag-Pol or HIV-1 Gag-Pol and Env Expressed from a Single Rhabdovirus-Based Vaccine Vector Genome. J Virol. 2003;77(20):10889–10899. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
76. Amara RR, Smith JM, Staprans SI, et al. Critical role for Env as well as Gag-Pol in control of a simian-human immunodeficiency virus 89.6P challenge by a DNA prime/recombinant modified vaccinia virus Ankara vaccine. J Virol. 2002;76(12):6138–6146. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
77. Earl PL, Wyatt LS, Montefiori DC, et al. Comparison of vaccine strategies using recombinant env-gag-pol MVA with or without an oligomeric Env protein boost in the SHIV rhesus macaque model. Virology. 2002;294(2):270–281. [PubMed]
78. Nabel G, Makgoba W, Esparza J. HIV-1 diversity and vaccine development. Science. 2002;296(5577):2335. [PubMed]
79. Ferrantelli F, Ruprecht RM. Neutralizing antibodies against HIV-back in the major leagues? Curr Opin Immunol. 2002;14(4):495–502. [PubMed]
80. Puffer BA, Pohlmann S, Edinger AL, et al. CD4 Independence of Simian Immunodeficiency Virus Envs Is Associated with Macrophage Tropism, Neutralization Sensitivity, and Attenuated Pathogenicity. J Virol. 2002;76(6):2595–2605. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
81. Deng H, Liu R, Ellmeier W, et al. Identification of a major coreceptor for primary isolates of HIV-1. Nature. 1996;381(6584):661–666. [PubMed]
82. Siciliano SJ, Kuhmann SE, Weng Y, et al. A Critical Site in the Core of the CCR5 Chemokine Receptor Required for Binding and Infectivity of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1. J Biol Chem. 1999;274(4):1905–1913. [PubMed]
83. Gonzales Matthew J, Delwart E, Rhee SY, et al. Lack of Detectable Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Superinfection during 1072 Personâ€Years of Observation. J Infect Dis. 2003;188(3):397–405. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
84. Clements JE, Montelaro RC, Zink MC, et al. Cross-protective immune responses induced in rhesus macaques by immunization with attenuated macrophage-tropic simian immunodeficiency virus. J Virol. 1995;69(5):2737–2744. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
85. Daniel MD, Kirchhoff F, Czajak SC, Sehgal PK, Desrosiers RC. Protective effects of a live attenuated SIV vaccine with a deletion in the nef gene. Science. 1992;258(5090):1938–1941. [PubMed]
86. Rencher SD, Slobod KS, Dawson DH, Lockey TD, Hurwitz JL. Does the key to a successful HIV type 1 vaccine lie among the envelope sequences of infected individuals? AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 1995;11(9):1131–1133. [PubMed]
87. Rencher SD, Hurwitz JL. Effect of natural HIV-1 envelope V1-V2 sequence diversity on the binding of V3-specific and non-V3-specific antibodies. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1997;16(2):69–73. [PubMed]
88. Zolla-Pazner S, Gorny MK, Nyambi PN, VanCott TC, Nadas A. Immunotyping of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV): an approach to immunologic classification of HIV. J Virol. 1999;73(5):4042–4051. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
89. Zolla-Pazner S. Identifying epitopes of HIV-1 that induce protective antibodies. Nat Rev Immunol. 2004;4(3):199–210. [PubMed]
90. Nilsson C, Makitalo B, Thorstensson R, et al. Live attenuated simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV)mac in macaques can induce protection against mucosal infection with SIVsm. Aids. 1998;12(17):2261–2270. [PubMed]
91. Wyand MS, Manson K, Montefiori DC, et al. Protection by live, attenuated simian immunodeficiency virus against heterologous challenge. J Virol. 1999;73(10):8356–8363. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
92. Wyand MS, Manson KH, Garcia-Moll M, Montefiori D, Desrosiers RC. Vaccine protection by a triple deletion mutant of simian immunodeficiency virus. J Virol. 1996;70(6):3724–3733. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
93. Cho MW, Kim YB, Lee MK, et al. Polyvalent envelope glycoprotein vaccine elicits a broader neutralizing antibody response but is unable to provide sterilizing protection against heterologous Simian/human immunodeficiency virus infection in pigtailed macaques. J Virol. 2001;75(5):2224–2234. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
94. Hel Z, Tryniszewska E, Tsai WP, et al. Design and In Vivo Immunogenicity of a Polyvalent Vaccine Based on SIVmac Regulatory Genes. DNA Cell Biol. 2002;21(9):619–626. [PubMed]
95. Ljungberg K, Rollman E, Eriksson L, Hinkula J, Wahren B. Enhanced immune responses after DNA vaccination with combined envelope genes from different HIV-1 subtypes. Virology. 2002;302(1):44–57. [PubMed]
96. Chakrabarti BK, Ling X, Yang ZY, et al. Expanded breadth of virus neutralization after immunization with a multiclade envelope HIV vaccine candidate. Vaccine. 2005;23(26):3434–3445. [PubMed]
97. Rollman E, Hinkula J, Arteaga J, et al. Multi-subtype gp160 DNA immunization induces broadly neutralizing anti-HIV antibodies. Gene Ther. 2004;11(14):1146–1154. [PubMed]
98. Pal R, Wang S, Kalyanaraman VS, et al. Polyvalent DNA prime and envelope protein boost HIV-1 vaccine elicits humoral and cellular responses and controls plasma viremia in rhesus macaques following rectal challenge with an R5 SHIV isolate. J Med Primatol. 2005;34(5–6):226–236. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
99. Pal R, Yu Q, Wang S, et al. Definitive toxicology and biodistribution study of a polyvalent DNA prime/protein boost human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) vaccine in rabbits. Vaccine. 2006;24(8):1225–1234. [PubMed]
100. Pal R, Wang S, Kalyanaraman VS, et al. Immunization of rhesus macaques with a polyvalent DNA prime/protein boost human immunodeficiency virus type 1 vaccine elicits protective antibody response against simian human immunodeficiency virus of R5 phenotype. Virology. 2006;348(2):341–353. [PubMed]
101. Cristillo AD, Wang S, Caskey MS, et al. Preclinical evaluation of cellular immune responses elicited by a polyvalent DNA prime/protein boost HIV-1 vaccine. Virology. 2006;346(1):151–168. [PubMed]
102. Wang S, Kennedy J, West K, et al. Balanced cellular and antibody responses induced by the polyvalent DNA prime-protein boost HIV-1 vaccine formulation DP6-001 in healthy human volunteers. Vaccine. 2008;26:1098–1110. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
103. Kennedy JS, Co M, Green S, et al. The safety and tolerability of an HIV-1 DNA prime-protein boost vaccine (DP6-001) in healthy adult volunteers. Vaccine. 2008;26(35):4420–4424. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
104. Vaine M, Wang S, Hackett A, Arthos J, Lu S. Antibody responses elicited through homologous or heterologous prime-boost DNA and protein vaccinations differ in functional activity and avidity. Vaccine. 2010;28(17):2999–3007. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
105. Lu S, Wang S, Kong X-P, et al. AIDS Vaccine. Atlanta, GA: 2010. Analysis of neutralizing antibody responses induced by gp120 DNA prime followed by monovalent or polyvalent V3 epitope boost. 2010.
106. Gorny MK, Xu JY, Gianakakos V, et al. Production of site-selected neutralizing human monoclonal antibodies against the third variable domain of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 envelope glycoprotein. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1991;88(8):3238–3242. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
107. Zolla-Pazner S, Cohen SS, Krachmarov C, et al. Focusing the immune response on the V3 loop, a neutralizing epitope of the HIV-1 gp120 envelope. Virology. 2008;372(2):233–246. [PubMed]
108. Fischer W, Perkins S, Theiler J, et al. Polyvalent vaccines for optimal coverage of potential T-cell epitopes in global HIV-1 variants. Nat Med. 2007;13(1):100–106. [PubMed]
109. Santra S, Liao H-X, Zhang R, et al. Mosaic vaccines elicit CD8+ T lymphocyte responses that confer enhanced immune coverage of diverse HIV strains in monkeys. Nat Med. 2010;16(3):324–328. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
110. Barouch DH, O'Brien KL, Simmons NL, et al. Mosaic HIV-1 vaccines expand the breadth and depth of cellular immune responses in rhesus monkeys. Nat Med. 2010;16(3):319–323. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
111. Binley JM, Wrin T, Korber B, et al. Comprehensive Cross-Clade Neutralization Analysis of a Panel of Anti-Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Monoclonal Antibodies. J Virol. 2004;78(23):13232–13252. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
PubReader format: click here to try

Formats:

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...

Links

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...