Women account for approximately 23 percent of people with HIV in the United States. In recent years, women aged 25 to 34 comprised the highest number of new diagnoses. Furthermore, Black women, transgender women, and women aged 13 through 24 are more likely to experience health disparities associated with lack of access to HIV testing, treatment, and prevention resources. This weekend marked National Women and Girls HIV/AIDS Awareness Day. NIAID supports research programs that focus on HIV and other health outcomes in women to inform and enable more targeted and effective HIV prevention, care, and treatment.
American Women: Assessing Risk Epidemiologically (AWARE)
The AWARE project aims to explore the multiple risks and vulnerabilities that lead to higher rates of HIV and other sexually transmitted infection (STI) acquisition in women, including transgender women. In the United States, the rate of new HIV diagnoses in Black women is about 14 times higher than their non-Black counterparts, and AWARE is designed to engage diverse racial and ethnic minorities, including Black women. AWARE is a national digital cohort with a primary goal of identifying women with greater likelihood of acquiring HIV and investigating contributing factors. The research group also seeks to design tailored and effective approaches to reaching women who reside in rural and underserved communities of color with HIV prevention and awareness resources.
CAMELLIA Cohort: A Longitudinal Study to Understand Sexual Health and Prevention Among Women in Alabama
The CAMELLIA Cohort supports cisgender and transgender women in Alabama who had a recent STI acquisitions and are impacted by disparities surrounding the lack of access to and the utilization of PrEP. The research program also uses a population-based approach to better understand how the quality of HIV and STI testing, in addition to HIV PrEP access, can be improved. CAMELLIA is sponsored by the University of Alabama at Birmingham in collaboration with NIAID and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).
HIV and Women at the 2024 Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI)
At CROI 2024, NIAID-supported studies reported results on women-controlled HIV prevention and cardiovascular health in women with HIV:
Pregnant people are three times more likely to acquire HIV than those who are not pregnant. The NIAID-sponsored DELIVER study, conducted by the Microbicide Trials Network, showed that the dapivirine vaginal ring and oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine- were each safe for HIV prevention throughout pregnancy. The large clinical study was conducted in Malawi, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe. Learn more about the DELIVER results presented at CROI.
A new analysis from the NIH-supported REPRIEVE trial found that the elevated cardiovascular disease risk among people with HIV is even greater than predicted by a standard risk calculator in several groups, including Black people and cisgender women. The study team concluded that updated tools are needed to facilitate precision, high-quality care of the diverse population with HIV. REPRIEVE enrolled 7,769 people with HIV across 12 countries, of whom 31% were women. Learn more about the REPRIEVE analysis presented at CROI, and the primary analysis that found pitavastatin reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events by 35% in people with HIV.
The NIH Office of AIDS Research (OAR) and Office of Research on Women’s Health (ORWH) jointly lead NIH’s HIV and Women Signature Program. The cornerstone of this new program is an intersectional, equity-informed, data-driven approach to research on HIV and women. The Signature Program advances the NIH vision for women's health, a world in which all women, girls, and gender-diverse people receive evidence-based care, prevention, and treatment tailored to their unique needs, circumstances, and goals. A new position paper, published February 26 in The Lancet HIV, outlines the framework for NIH's approach to research on HIV and women and highlights selected topics of relevance for women, girls, and gender-diverse people with or affected by HIV. The program also supports women in science careers to meet their full professional potential. From March 21-22, the OAR and ORWH will host the NIH HIV & Women Scientific Workshop: Centering the Health of Women in HIV Research. The workshop will review the state of the science on HIV and women to inform the future research agenda. Learn more.
Development of diagnostics tools to detect exposure to pathogens, insects, and ticks The host immune response to insect-borne pathogens Pathogen-insect interactions Field expertise in epidemiology and pathogen transmission of insect-borne diseases
Last Reviewed: February 26, 2025
Postdoc Spotlight – National Postdoc Appreciation Week 2024
In honor of National Postdoc Appreciation Week 2024, the NIAID Office of Research Training and Development is recognizing NIAID postdocs who enrich the NIAID training community through their outstanding mentorship. The following postdocs were nominated by their postbac mentees for their exemplary mentorship. Read about their research contributions and mentoring philosophies here.
Kyle O’Donnell, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Fellow, Immunobiology and Molecular Virology Section, Laboratory of Virology
My research focuses on emerging viruses, particularly filoviruses. I use flow cytometry and immunological assays to characterize immune responses to vaccination and filovirus challenge. My work involves cell culture studies as well as several animal models, ranging from mice to non-human primates, and has two primary areas of focus. The first is characterizing the complete functionality profile of the humoral immune response, including neutralization and Fc effector function analysis. The second is understanding the cellular immune response. I have a particular interest in analyzing early natural killer cell phenotypes and memory T-cell phenotypes.
What Good Mentorship Means to Me
Good mentorship is built on a two-way relationship of trust between the mentor and the mentee. I strive to give my mentees guidance and a framework to succeed, ensuring they have the proper training and skillsets needed to be successful in the lab. I have found that communicating expectations clearly, starting slow, and building up responsibilities sets the mentees up for success as they gain experience in their new research environment. Once the mentee has fully grasped the methodologies associated with their project, I give them the freedom to manage their work schedule and experimental timelines within set expectations. More importantly, I believe it is critical to give mentees the freedom to learn how to best manage expectations, drive their project, and view science from a bench-side perspective. I strongly believe allowing guided freedom cultivates a true passion for science because the mentee develops individual problem-solving strategies or realizes that perhaps another career path may be more suited for them. Regardless, either outcome is an absolutely wonderful achievement.
My Advice to Postdoctoral Mentors
For a successful mentor-mentee relationship, both parties must cultivate trust in one another from the start. Maintaining open communication and meeting often allows the mentor to set clear expectations and the mentee to advocate for what they need for their career development.
Emma Price, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Fellow, Molecular Pathology Section, Laboratory of Immunogenetics
My postdoctoral work focuses on understanding the molecular mechanisms of two key proteins, CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF) and CCCTC binding factor-Like (CTCFL), across various biological contexts, including neurodevelopment, spermatogenesis, cancer, and aging. My research primarily involves the development and application of a novel humanized mouse model to investigate the role of Brother of Regulator of Imprinted Sites (BORIS), also known as CTCFL, in its normal cellular environment, specifically in spermatogonia, as well as in abnormal cellular contexts, such as tumorigenesis. The goal of this research is to provide tissue-specific insights that could lead to the development of biomarkers and therapeutic strategies for cancers associated with aberrant BORIS activation.
What Good Mentorship Means to Me
Mentorship has been crucial in my career. Reflecting on my journey, the guidance I received from good mentors profoundly impacted my development as a research scientist, helping me realize my potential and gain the confidence to take the next steps. Personally, I think it starts with truly listening to what your mentees aim to achieve, understanding their goals, and working together to tailor their experiences to meet those goals. Every mentee is unique—some may have well-defined plans, such as pursuing medical school or specializing in a specific research field, while others are still exploring their options and might need more guidance. As a mentor, it is essential to recognize these differences and adapt your approach to effectively support each individual's journey. By acknowledging their individual strengths and areas for growth, you can provide guidance, training opportunities, and tasks that best align with their aspirations.
Successful mentorship also means being approachable and maintaining open lines of communication. It involves being patient and understanding that mentees may sometimes need extra support, whether in relation to their lab work or personal challenges. Creating an environment where mentees feel comfortable discussing their concerns is vital. Being friendly and supportive goes a long way in building the trust necessary for effective mentorship. Furthermore, mentorship in science is not just about providing guidance—it is about fostering growth. This means helping mentees become more knowledgeable and skilled, setting clear expectations, and allowing them the opportunity to take the lead on their tasks. Encouraging independence builds their confidence and prepares them to stand on their own. Ultimately, mentorship is about creating an environment where mentees feel valued, supported, and empowered to grow into capable and confident scientists.
My Advice to Postdoctoral Mentors
Listen to your mentees’ goals, tailor their experiences to support their unique paths, and always be approachable. Good mentorship is about building trust, clear communication, and empowering the next generation of scientists to be skillful, knowledgeable, and confident.
Jordan Chang, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Fellow, DNA Tumor Virus Section, Laboratory of Viral Diseases
During a Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection, the virus hijacks a wide array of host proteins to aid in its own replication. Within a replication focus, the virus must replicate its DNA genome and transcribe its viral transcripts all while keeping its own viral expression limited to evade the host immune response. However, it is unknown how these various processes are compartmentalized within given foci. My current work focuses on exploring the spatiotemporal organization of viral and host factors within HPV replication foci under the guidance of Alison McBride, Ph.D.
What Good Mentorship Means to Me
To be honest, I never saw myself as a mentor to any of my lab mates or students. I merely offered help when someone approached me with a question or a problem that I have experience with. Perhaps that is my approach to mentorship. A good mentor is different than being a good teacher. While teaching is regimented and deliberate in relaying as much information as possible, effective mentorship is giving the pertinent information needed to address a particular problem. It is not about having all the right answers or showing how much detail you know about a particular topic. Instead, it is about conversing with your mentee as a peer to work through the problem together. The relationship a mentor has with their mentee and how we as mentors interact with them is what defines good mentorship. Successful mentorship uplifts the mentee’s confidence in their own skills and inspires them to want to pursue the topic further. Through my many years of studies, I have had many mentors in my life. I find that I was more motivated and inspired when my mentor and I were speaking like colleagues rather than a teacher talking to a student or trainee. Collegial discussions helped build my confidence as a scientist to ask questions and critically assess data. These interactions truly fostered my critical thinking and research skills; they created a space that allowed me to make mistakes and entertain my ideas without fear.
My Advice to Postdoctoral Mentors
Treat your mentees as peers. Our job as mentors is not to make them feel as though we are a second boss for them to report to, but rather a colleague who they can trust to bring up problems and guide them through the problem-solving process.
Maya Sangesland, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Fellow, Molecular Immunoengineering Section, Immunology Laboratory, Vaccine Research Center
My research centers on using vaccines to interrogate basic principles of immunology. For example, we are curious about understanding public B cell immunity, which is an adaptive immune response that is recurrent, highly similar, and shared across many genetically unrelated individuals. Critically, public B cells and antibodies tend to be highly protective against pathogens or groups of pathogens. Thus, understanding their origin and development as well as how to best elicit B cell responses through vaccination is key for not only generating protective immunity but also for developing effective vaccines.
What Good Mentorship Means to Me
I have been very fortunate to have had great mentors throughout my scientific training, from which I have come to understand the importance of mentorship to the overall trainee experience. In graduate school, I was given the advice to “pick the mentor over the scientific research.” As a postdoctoral fellow, there are certain key elements from my previous experiences that I try to incorporate day-to-day while mentoring my trainees. First, I aim to create an overall positive environment where mentees feel comfortable asking questions, exchanging ideas, and are supported no matter their goals. With this in mind, I prioritize being available to answer quick questions or to have longer discussions if needed. Even now, I find my previous mentors are still readily available, even if it is via a quick email. Second, I believe that the mentor-mentee relationship should be one of equals, where junior trainees are respected and treated as future peers and not just a pair of hands. They are active contributors that help drive the project forward. From my experience, having the respect of my mentors allowed me to develop a sense of ownership and excitement for science, which is something I hope to instill now in my trainees. At the end of the day, I hope to show that it is possible to have fun while doing good science.
My Advice to Postdoctoral Mentors
Every trainee has different needs, and as a postdoc, it is important to start where they are and understand what they need to succeed.
Morgan Brisse, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Fellow, Viral Immunity and Pathogenesis Unit, Laboratory of Viral Diseases
My research in the Viral Immunity and Pathogenesis Unit led by Heather Hickman, Ph.D., focuses on how several aspects of the host immune system uniquely contribute to antiviral responses. Key areas include the contribution of the lymphatic system towards regulating antibody circulation, the behavior of monocytes recruited to sites of skin infection, and the interplay between viral infection and vascular permeability. We aim to guide our research using the increasing specificity against cellular, viral, and anatomical targets that has become available for modern medical treatment.
What Good Mentorship Means to Me
Like any other mentor, I seek to emulate mentors that have made a positive difference in my scientific career. Many of my most memorable and positive mentorship experiences are of the people who shared their own struggles from their times as early scientists. Laboratory research requires a lot of time, knowledge, and skill development to start generating any interpretable results, and there are many points during one’s start in science where a person can get derailed if not properly supported and encouraged. We all pass down scientific knowledge and our troubleshooting techniques, but we also gain something from sharing more generalized experiences of becoming a scientist. Sharing generalized scientific experiences helps equalize us as a team of people who have faced similar challenges and allows us to share celebrations in our successes. We also can see how much we all grow as scientists when we are on the same team, which I think is perhaps the most satisfying part of mentorship.
My Advice to Postdoctoral Mentors
Mentorship is an investment of your current efforts into your future performance. While it requires time and patience up front, you will be rewarded with a cohesive team that learns from each other and delivers quality science.
My research focuses on lung alveolar epithelial damage and repair following infection with respiratory viruses that cause severe disease. We have established human lung organoid models to study the comparative pathogenesis of multiple respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, Nipah virus, and H5N1 influenza A virus in human alveolar epithelium. Going forward, we are developing novel human lung organoid-based models to include additional relevant cell types and to facilitate studies of alveolar differentiation and tissue repair. This work will help us identify new host-targeted therapeutic strategies to treat severe lower respiratory tract infections.
What Good Mentorship Means to Me
Mentoring trainees is one of the most rewarding parts of science and has really contributed to my scientific development over the years. Supportive and engaged mentors opened the door for my scientific career, and I aim to provide the same level of support for my mentees to help them accomplish their goals. I have had the opportunity to mentor three postbaccalaureate fellows while at NIH. I have learned a lot from each of them and I am very proud of their scientific and professional development. To me, good mentorship involves understanding your mentee’s individual goals and learning styles as well as tailoring your mentorship to meet their needs. Leading by example and honestly discussing mistakes when you make them helps to create an open and constructive environment where mentees can learn and ask questions without judgement. Making yourself approachable, and encouraging other lab members to do the same, helps new and junior trainees feel comfortable participating in group discussions. This first step can be something simple, like connecting with them over a shared hobby or interest. Lastly, the most important (and most rewarding) aspect of mentorship from my perspective is helping trainees develop into independent scientists. Promoting scientific curiosity through discussion and helping them follow up experimentally on their ideas is important. Trainees bring fresh perspectives and ideas that can challenge the status quo, and it is exciting to see them take research in unexpected directions.
My Advice to Postdoctoral Mentors
Great mentors lead by example. Discovering your mentee’s learning style and fostering a supportive environment with open and honest communication will help you and your mentee become a successful team.
Samantha Crane, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Fellow, Bacterial Physiology and Metabolism Unit, Laboratory of Bacteriology
My research in the Bacterial Physiology and Metabolism Unit is focused on understanding the significance of peptide acquisition systems in the Lyme disease spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi, and the relapsing fever spirochete, Borrelia hermsii, during their enzootic cycle. As these pathogens are transmitted via hard or soft tick vectors, my research uses tick and murine models as well as in vitro approaches. My research background has focused on host-pathogen interactions and host responses, so I try to integrate these topics into my current work, which is primarily focused on bacteriology and molecular biology techniques.
What Good Mentorship Means to Me
Good mentorship exists inside and outside of the laboratory. In the beginning of a mentor-mentee relationship in the lab, I aim to assist without being overbearing to develop a mentee’s confidence and independence. I typically ask a mentee how comfortable they are with a technique and decide from there how involved I need to be in instructing. I usually start by modeling how a technique or experiment is done and then check in with the trainee throughout these processes. Over time, comfort and independence develop. Good mentorship also includes helping mentees understand why they are doing the work they do. I try to explain the big picture of a project frequently to contextualize smaller experiments that fit into the big picture and the main research question. I also strive to take a mentoring approach that emphasizes a growth mindset. It is particularly important for early career mentees who are developing resilience strategies to understand that failures and unexpected outcomes are important for growth and development. Failures and unexpected outcomes happen to everyone, and each opportunity is a chance to learn and grow.
Outside of the lab, effective mentorship means helping mentees achieve their goals. While it is easier for me if a trainee wants to follow my direct career path, it is unrealistic to expect or prepare for only this. I check in with my mentees to see what they are interested in and offer them advice or resources that align with their interests to nurture them. At conferences, I point out sessions and talks that would interest them and introduce them to people I know in order to help with networking. I aim to pay forward good mentorship shown to me in my career by helping mentees get farther than I have gotten in my career.
My Advice to Postdoctoral Mentors
The list of things to do is never-ending and there’s limited time to finish them. However, patience, empathy, and communication with mentees is critical. Self-care is also crucial for good mentorship. Mentors need to take care of themselves to effectively guide their mentees.
My research work focuses on the role of host E3 ubiquitin ligases in the defense against disease-causing pathogens, with a special interest in Toxoplasma gondii and SARS-CoV-2 infection. During infection, pathogens alter cellular pathways in their host cell to maintain their biological niche. Identification of such pathways and the mechanisms involved during these processes are another aspect of my postdoctoral research. In general, our study will provide deeper insight into how the pathogen uses the host’s cellular network for their development and how the host counters and restricts the pathogen’s growth.
What Good Mentorship Means to Me
Successful mentorship is more than just giving advice; it entails developing a supportive, trust-based relationship in which the mentor actively listens, offers constructive feedback, and assists the mentee in setting and achieving meaningful goals. It requires empathy, patience, and a genuine interest in the mentee's development, as well as a commitment to providing knowledge and sharing experiences that can assist with problem solving. Finally, it is about encouraging the mentee to build their own talents and confidence while nurturing a pleasant, progressive atmosphere.
My Advice to Postdoctoral Mentors
I believe that good mentoring begins with attentively listening to your mentee to understand their objectives and obstacles. Collaborate to establish specific, attainable goals, and give constructive and supportive feedback. Sharing your experiences and lessons learnt might provide helpful insights. Encourage your mentee to take the initiative and make individual decisions while staying accessible for advice. Be patient and adaptive, knowing that progress takes time, and that each mentee is unique.
Today marks the 140th anniversary of the announcement by Dr. Robert Koch that tuberculosis (TB) is caused by the bacterium Mycobacterium tuberculosis. World TB Day is a reminder that this ancient disease remains a relentless killer. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health, affirms its commitment to the 2022 World TB Day theme
The IRF-Frederick is equipped with a one-of-a-kind multi-modality imaging suite, containing both clinical and pre-clinical imaging scanners, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and computed tomography (CT).
The burden of malaria remains intolerable, causing over 200 million clinical cases and 400,000 deaths each year, with pregnant women and children in Africa bearing the greatest risk. Antimalarial drugs and insecticide-treated nets have effectively reduced malaria cases over the last few decades, but progress has stalled in recent years as these measures decline in efficacy. Vaccination remains a key strategy to bolster control efforts towards reduction and elimination of this scourge.
Malaria vaccines target the major stages of the Plasmodium life cycle and are distinguished by three distinct types: 1) Pre-erythrocytic (also called anti-infection) vaccines aim to prevent sporozoite invasion into the liver after inoculation by a feeding mosquito; 2) Blood stage (also called anti-disease) vaccines target asexual parasite forms that emerge from the liver to infect erythrocytes and multiply, causing clinical illness; and 3) Mosquito stage (more widely known as “transmission-blocking”) vaccines target sexual stages of the parasite, eliciting antibodies that are taken up mosquitoes in a bloodmeal, which then halt parasite development in the mosquito midgut, preventing further transmission to the next human host.
The Laboratory of Malaria Immunology and Vaccinology (LMIV)
LMIV was commissioned in 2009 to conduct basic and applied research relevant to malaria immunology and vaccine development, pursue novel vaccine concepts, produce prototype malaria vaccines, and conduct early-phase clinical trials of promising vaccine candidates. Our overarching goal is to develop malaria vaccines that will reduce severe disease and death among African children and pregnant women and eliminate malaria from low-transmission areas of the world.
LMIV has an organizational structure that encompasses both basic discovery and product development within a small, integrated team. Discovery sections within LMIV conduct basic research on malaria pathogenesis and immunology, with emphasis on studies in humans who are naturally or experimentally infected with malaria parasites. In parallel, the Vaccine Development Unit operates more like a small biotech firm than a typical research laboratory. Specialists in each step of the development process, from antigen selection, vaccine process development and manufacture, and preclinical animal modeling to clinical trials and assays of the immune response, contribute their expertise as the candidate moves along the development pathway. This allows multiple vaccine candidates to advance from concept to clinical trials efficiently and rapidly. Together, the Discovery sections and Vaccine Development Unit form a research and testing enterprise that can rapidly translate ideas into proof-of-concept trials, capture data about human immunity and responses to infection, which then inform new and improved strategies.
LMIV is the global leader in transmission-blocking vaccine development. Our leading TBV candidate, named Pfs230D1, is currently being tested in a phase 2 clinical trial evaluating safety and functional activity in malaria-endemic communities in Mali. Read about the ongoing community trial of Pfs230D1 in Mali, and the recent news release announcing our planned clinical trials of TBVs throughout West Africa, in collaboration with partners from the Netherlands, Denmark, Mali, Burkina Faso, Liberia, and Guinea.
Develop strategies for anti-infection, anti-disease, and transmission-blocking vaccines, including those that specifically protect pregnant women and their infants
Conduct large longitudinal cohort studies to describe malaria epidemiology, especially in pregnant women and young children
Execute human studies of natural or experimental controlled malaria infections to interrogate the host response and the characteristics of protective immunity
Apply functional genomics tools including RNA sequencing and library screening platforms to identify targets of protective antibodies,
Use structural biology, biochemistry, biophysics, immunology and microbiology approaches to enhance our basic understanding of malaria pathogenesis and host-parasite interactions in humans
Engineer novel antigens that will lead to protection using structural vaccinology
Develop assays, animal models, and perform preclinical trials that define the potential for protection
Produce and formulate antigens suitable for human testing through quality control and quality assurance principles
Assess vaccine platforms, nanoparticles, and adjuvant formulations to enhance vaccine immunogenicity and safety
Execute clinical trials to test vaccines in the United States and in malaria-endemic areas
Establish scientific collaborations and obtain outside funding to accelerate the program
See the published Annual Reports for each section of the LMIV by searching “Duffy, Patrick”, “Michal Fried”, or “Niraj Tolia” under Principal Investigator/Project Leader on the website.
A newly published paper in The Lancet shows that an experimental vaccine against Marburg virus (MARV) was safe and induced an immune response in a small, first-in-human clinical trial. The vaccine, developed by researchers at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health, could someday be an important tool to respond to Marburg virus
Published: January 30, 2023
Epstein-Barr Virus’s Molecular Mimicry Reveals a Key Site of Vulnerability
3D models showing the molecular footprints of the Epstein-Barr virus gp350 surface protein (left, in green) and the complement component Cd3 ligand (right, in pink) on the B cell surface protein complement receptor 2 (CR2; shown in duplicate side-by-side, in gray).
Credit:NIAID
Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is a common virus that causes mononucleosis, or mono for short, and is associated with some types of cancer and autoimmune diseases. Despite EBV’s known effects and potential to cause disease, there are few therapeutic options and no licensed vaccines targeting the virus. Looking for ways to counter EBV, NIAID researchers are examining how the virus recognizes and interacts with cells at the molecular level. New research published in Immunity reveals the high-resolution crystal structure of a protein on the surface of EBV in complex with the receptor it binds to on the surface of human immune cells, called B cells. The researchers also discovered antibodies that potently neutralize EBV and found that they recognize the viral surface protein using interactions similar to those between EBV and its receptor on host cells. This research identifies a vulnerable site on EBV that could lead to the design of much-needed interventions against the virus.
EBV, also known as human herpesvirus 4, is one of the most common human viruses—nine out of ten people have or will have EBV in their lifetime. After being infected with EBV, many people experience no symptoms, but some experience symptoms of mononucleosis, such as fever, sore throat and fatigue. These symptoms are often mild but can be more severe in teens or adults. After the early stages of infection, the virus hides in the body and can emerge later in life or when the immune system is weakened. Recent studies have also found that EBV is linked to several types of cancer, autoimmune diseases including lupus, and other disorders.
A key step in EBV infection is for the virus to enter a cell in the body, which begins with the virus binding to a protein on the cell’s surface. The researchers, led by Dr. Masaru Kanekiyo, chief of the Molecular Immunoengineering Section at NIAID’s Vaccine Research Center, examined the atomic-level structure of an EBV surface protein called gp350 when bound to a protein on the surface of B cells called complement receptor type 2 (CR2). Usually, CR2 binds to a protein fragment, or ligand, called complement component C3d as a part of the immune response following a viral infection. The researchers found that the EBV protein precisely bound to the cell surface protein CR2 at the region where its natural ligand C3d binds, revealing that there is structural similarity between EBV and C3d in recognizing CR2 and how the virus exploits this interaction to enter and infect a cell.
The researchers also isolated neutralizing antibodies (nAbs)—immune proteins that neutralize EBV—from animals immunized against EBV and EBV-infected people. They found that the antibodies neutralized the virus in laboratory tests by binding to the EBV gp350 protein. They further determined the atomic-level structure of three of the nAbs when bound to EBV gp350. All three nAbs bound to gp350 at the same region of the protein—the region where it also binds to the cell protein CR2, demonstrating that this binding site is an important target on the virus for neutralization.
The way the CR2 cell surface protein binds its natural ligand C3d can be likened to a key fitting a lock. In this case, the key is a negatively charged pocket on the surface of C3d, while the lock is an arrangement of positively charged arginine residues on the surface of CR2. The researchers observed a remarkable molecular mimicry that occurred in duplicate. On one side, EBV gp350 mimics the characteristics of C3d, pretending to be the natural key that fits CR2 on the cell surface, unlocking the cell for the virus to infect it. On the other side, the anti-EBV nAbs mimic CR2, where they act as a lock to block the EBV gp350 protein from binding to a cell for the virus to infect. The mimicry existing on both sides of this lock-and-key set indicates that this interaction is an important step for EBV infection—and represents a major point of viral vulnerability, according to the researchers.
The findings define critical molecular interactions between EBV and its host cells. The researchers noted that more work is needed to apply these findings to the development of interventions, including examining whether the newly discovered nAbs can provide protection from EBV infection in animal models and people. This research may reveal new avenues to treat and prevent disease caused by this widespread pathogen.
The AIDS Imaging Research Section (AIRS) leverages preclinical and translational molecular imaging to study the pathogenesis of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection using the simian/simian-human immunodeficiency virus (SIV/SHIV) nonhuman primate model.
As part of the “Stepping into Science” experience, students from Hamilton and Corvallis high schools tried on positive-pressure research suits in the BSL-4 training room at NIAID’s Rocky Mountain Laboratories.
Credit:NIAID
‘Stepping into Science’ Highlights Variety of Scientific Careers
NIAID’s RML Campus Hosts Day-Long High School Program
Introducing local students to biomedical science and research has long been a feature of outreach programs at NIAID’s Rocky Mountain Laboratories in Hamilton, Montana. However, realizing that traditional laboratory science—aka “bench research”—isn’t for everyone, RML staff recently invited two dozen area high school students to experience not only traditional research but also the lesser-known careers that make bench research possible.
Where bench science can be slow and methodical—scientists may spend their entire career investigating the same problem—jobs that support bench research often vary greatly from project to project. Both types of careers are rewarding and exciting—but appeal to different types of people.
“Stepping into Science,” held this spring at the RML campus, was the idea of Kamryn Cregger, who began postbaccalaureate research work at RML in August 2023. Cregger says she quickly realized that RML had amazing resources to benefit area students, and she hoped to provide them with a similar type of opportunity that she experienced as a high schooler in rural Maryland. Cregger enrolled in a biomedical leadership program that led to a pharmaceutical internship, two years of lab training, and ultimately a bachelor’s degree in plant sciences from the University of Tennessee.
Now working on tickborne disease projects at RML—and helping local middle-school students through RML’s Biomedical Research After School Scholars program—Cregger wanted to find a way to connect with college-bound high schoolers.
“With all of the scientists and staff members on site, why not show the local students what kinds of jobs there are in science in addition to bench work?” she thought. Making those types of connections also could establish the RML group as long-term mentors for students applying for college, internships, or career positions.
After a few months of planning meetings, coordinating with RML volunteers, and finding out what most appealed to students and faculty from Hamilton and Corvallis high schools—the groups arrived for the whirlwind day of activities at RML.
“Throughout the day,” Cregger said, “students asked questions about careers, RML research, medical school application processes, the differences in academic versus government research and even vaccine development!” Students received a campus tour, overview of the types of research done in the different laboratory groups and rotated through three hands-on demonstrations by virologists, animal care staff and microscopists.
A team of RML virologists worked together to demonstrate biosafety knowledge, proper laboratory skills, such as pipetting, working in a biosafety cabinet, and dressing in personal protective equipment (PPE). They even designed a way for students to participate in a fun research-based game.
The three microscopists—Forrest Hoyt, Sophia Antonioli-Schmit and Bryan Hansen—all discussed their remarkable journeys from local high schools to RML.
In the animal care segment, “We taught them about animal husbandry, histology technicians, biologists and veterinarians,” veterinary pathologist Carl Shaia said. “Someone in each of those positions described their duties, education and how they came to RML. We also briefly touched on pay, the importance of benefits and the impact of student debt for higher education.”
RML biologist Tara Wehrly’s daughter participated in the events. Wehrly said she appreciated how the activities gave her daughter a greater understanding of the work she does.
“My daughter knows I work here, and I talk about scientific matters, but until she was on campus, it was more of an abstract concept,” Wehrly said. “I feel that Kamryn (Cregger) found the right people to give enthusiastic, informative presentations communicating the fun parts of their jobs to this group of teenagers. The discussions the kids had with post-bacs and post-docs gave them information about potential career paths that they might not have considered prior to this.”
Cregger and other event organizers already are discussing where to take the idea next, starting off with hopes of continuing the program for years to come. RML would like to inspire generations of science-loving people “and is honored to help guide the students down whatever path they choose,” according to Cregger.
This document provides an overview of research and training programs opportunities for 2019-2020 available through the Division of Intramural Research.
Role of body-brain axis in the control of innate immune response Representation and regulation of distinct types of immune responses by the brain Modulation of immune responses by sensory experience and internal states
The Pathogenesis and Immunity Section conducts human and animal studies of malaria pathogenesis and host immunity, including population-based studies in communities exposed to Plasmodium falciparum. Our research emphasizes pregnant women and children, the populations most susceptible to malaria morbidity and mortality, with collaborative cohort studies ongoing in Mali, Liberia and Guinea.
Researchers observed rapid and distinct immune system changes in a small study of people who switched to a vegan or a ketogenic (also called keto) diet. Scientists closely monitored various biological responses of people sequentially eating vegan and keto diets for two weeks, in random order. They found that the vegan diet prompted responses linked to innate immunity—the body’s non-specific first line of defense against pathogens—while the keto diet prompted responses associated with adaptive immunity—pathogen-specific immunity built through exposures in daily life and vaccination. Metabolic changes and shifts in the participants' microbiomes—communities of bacteria living in the gut—were also observed. More research is needed to determine if these changes are beneficial or detrimental and what effect they could have on nutritional interventions for diseases such as cancer or inflammatory conditions.
NIAID-funded basic and clinical studies helped establish the fundamental knowledge necessary for the private sector to develop protein vaccines. These vaccines are safe and effective at preventing severe RSV in some target populations.
Last Reviewed: May 1, 2023
Adjuvant Comparison
Credit:NIAID
Rational adjuvant selection for a vaccine is facilitated by the availability of a detailed characterization of the immune profile induced by the adjuvant. NIAID adjuvant comparison programs support the systematic side-by-side comparison of immune responses induced by various types of adjuvanted vaccines and include the computational integration of the data to establish immunological “fingerprints” of adjuvants in different host species. Through such programs, third-party adjuvants can be evaluated through testing pipelines established by NIAID contractors.
The ACC program supports three contracts: Duke University (PI: Herman Staats), Stanford University (PI: Bali Pulendran), University of California Irvine (PI: Philip Felgner);
Adjuvants will be compared in peanut allergy and infectious disease models in mouse, human tonsil organoid, and non-human primate models;
Data generated through the program will enable the rational selection of adjuvants and the future development of more effective vaccines against infectious diseases, and/or new vaccines to treat allergic or autoimmune diseases.
The AVAR-T program supports one contract awarded to The University of Sydney/Centenary Institute (PIs: Warwick Britton, Angelo Izzo and James Triccas);
The mechanism of action of three adjuvants, Advax-CpG, Alhydroxiquim-II and CAF01 will be determined when formulated with three Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) immunogens to induce protective immunity in preclinical animal models;
These studies will facilitate the identification of novel TB vaccines candidates for clinical development and potential correlates of protection.
By Lila Berle, postbac in the Tuberculosis Research Section of the Laboratory of Clinical Immunology and Microbiology
The much-anticipated 2022 NIH Postbac Poster Days took place this year from March 26 through 28, with 940 postbacs presenting their research in a virtual conference hall. The unique platform emulated the experience of attending in-person presentations, as both trainees and judges bounced between rooms to visit the posters of NIH postbacs eager to describe the research they’ve been working on all year.
The event was filled with fantastic presentations, and we will delve into four here.
Isabella focuses on the relationship between retinoic acid within the gut and the expression of the CCR5 coreceptor. To educate her audience about the application of her work, Isabella explained how HIV uses CCR5 as it adheres to host cells. Isabella then discussed how retinoic acid functions as an immunoregulatory agent and also described her interest in the effect of retinoic acid on MAdCAM and anti-CD28 co-stimulated CD4+ T cells.
Isabella’s experiments ultimately allowed her to show that retinoic acid is related to the upregulation of coreceptors CCR5, CCR9, and beta 7 in cells that are stimulated with interleukin 2. Her work is inspiring when viewed through the lens of basic science research and could also serve as a launch point for clinical or translation studies focusing on the interaction between HIV and CD4+ T cells.
Like many others, Genevieve is passionate about COVID-19 research. However, she does not focus on primary COVID-19 infections; instead, she studies the risk factors and experiences of patients with Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC). To begin, she oriented her audience by explaining that this condition encompasses persistent symptoms such as a cough, brain fog, and fatigue.
Genevieve’s poster illustrated the clinical data she used to determine whether individuals with PASC are at an increased risk of reinfection and also included information on the relationships between reinfection, vaccination status, and comorbid conditions. Going forward, she is particularly interested in studying whether the symptoms of patients diagnosed with PASC following a primary infection change after reinfection with SARS-CoV-2.
In her research, Jacquelyn combines fascinating aspects of analytical chemistry and biochemistry as she uses mass spectrometry to learn more about cell metabolism. Her poster discussed the data she gathered from studying wound healing of keratinocytes in both cell culture models and biopsy samples. Jacquelyn also explained that she uses her mass spec data and the MetaboAnalysis program to focus on sialic acid metabolism, which is upregulated in wound healing.
Jacquelyn is looking forward to experimenting with the insertion of exogenous sialic acid into her keratinocyte cultures and is interested in testing time-dependent wound healing within this environment.
Micah’s poster invited his audience to view the existence of mosquitos not as a mere nuisance, but as an opportunity. His project focuses on generating transgenic mosquitoes that produce antibodies reactive to Plasmodium falciparum, the parasite that causes malaria. He described how these mosquito antibodies bind a protein expressed on the female gametes of the parasite, which then decreases its ability to use the mosquito as a viable host.
In his talk, Micah addressed the process of optimizing antibody generation to decrease the fitness cost to mosquitos and also expanded on his future directions. Going forward, he is eager to continue optimizing the expression of the single-chain antibody in the mosquito by employing different promoters and is also interested in quantifying the expression of the parasitic protein within the gut of mosquitos.
For many postbacs, poster days serve as an opportunity to step outside of their familiar research to learn from their peers. Additionally, it is refreshing to hear the opinions of other trainees as they ask clarifying questions and inquire about future directions. Perhaps in 2023 this event will occur in person; either way, the 2022 poster days marked another year of both flexibility and productivity.
Congratulations to the 39 NIAID postbacs who received Outstanding Poster Awards at this year’s event! These individuals’ posters scored in the top 20% of all posters presented. See the list of winners.
