In this task, you're given a paragraph from the research paper and your task is to generate a suitable title for the research paper based on the given paper. Under 100 words is a good title length.

[EX Q]: Dendritic cells (DC)-derived or tumor-derived exosomes are a population of nanometer sized membrane vesicles that can induce specific anti-tumor immunity. However, the immunogenic potential and efficiency of exosomes-based tumor vaccine are not satisfactory enough to achieve a curative effect in clinical trials. In this article we investigated whether IL-18 genetic modification of tumor cells can increase the efficacy of exosomes derived from IL-18 gene-modified tumor cells. We transfected carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-expressing tumor cells with a recombinant adenovirus encoding human IL-18 (AdhIL-18) and prepared the exosomes, Exo/IL-18, from IL-18 gene-modified tumor cells. We found that Exo/IL-18 naturally contain CEA and bioactive IL-18. Moreover, Exo-IL-18 are potent in chemoattracting DC and T cells, enhancing the proliferation and Th1 cytokine release of PBMC, and promoting the phenotypic and functional maturation of DC. Furthermore, Exo/IL-18-pulsed DC are quite potent to induce HLA-A*0201-restricted, CEA-specific CD8 + CTL from the PBMC of HLA-A*0201 CEA + cancer patients in vitro. In almost all of these experiments, Exo/IL-18 show more potent functions than the conventionally prepared exosomes derived from parent tumor cells without IL-18 gene modification. Our findings suggest that Exo/IL-18 has more potent capability to induce specific anti-tumor immunity, and our strategy of IL-18 modification of exosomes is a feasible approach to develop exosomesbased tumor vaccines.
[EX A]: Enhanced induction of dendritic cell maturation and HLA-A*0201-restricted CEA-specific CD8 + CTL response by exosomes derived from IL-18 gene-modified CEA-positive tumor cells

[EX Q]: Recently identified broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) show great potential for clinical interventions against HIV-1 infection. However, resistant strains may impose substantial challenges. Here, we report on the identification and characterization of a panel of HIV-1 strains with broad and potent resistance against a large number of bnAbs, particularly those targeting the CD4-binding site (CD4bs). Site-directed mutagenesis revealed that several key epitope mutations facilitate resistance and are located in the inner domain, loop D, and β23/loop V5/β24 of HIV-1 gp120. The resistance is largely correlated with binding affinity of antibodies to the envelope trimers expressed on the cell surface. Our results therefore demonstrate the existence of broadly resistant HIV-1 strains against CD4bs neutralizing antibodies. Treatment strategies based on the CD4bs bnAbs must overcome such resistance to achieve optimal clinical outcomes. Recently identified broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) show great potential for clinical interventions against HIV-1 infection. Among the bnAbs isolated to date, those targeting the CD4bs are the most abundant and thoroughly studied as they disrupt the crucial step of viral interaction with the cellular receptor molecule CD4. Despite the superior potency and breadth of these CD4bs bnAbs, each fails to neutralize a small but significant portion of pseudotyped virus panels. Here, we report on the identification and characterization of a panel of HIV-1 strains with broad and potent resistance against a large number of bnAbs, particularly those targeting the CD4bs. Resistance is largely attributed to mutated residues within the epitopes or steric hindrance imposed by the bulky side-chain or glycan shield of the mutated residues, and is largely correlated with reduced binding avidity of the antibody to the quaternary trimeric envelope protein expressed on the PLOS Pathogens | https://doi.surface of the transfected cells. Treatment strategies based on the CD4bs bnAbs therefore must overcome such resistance to achieve optimal clinical outcomes. Recent scientific advances have identified a growing number of broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) against human immunodeficiency virus type I (HIV-1), providing promising candidates for HIV-1 prevention and treatment [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] . Compared with bnAbs isolated in earlier studies, these bnAbs demonstrated broader and more potent activity against global HIV-1 panels and displayed impressive safety and efficacy profiles for therapeutic applications in a number of animal models and human clinical trials [1, [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] . These results also offer the opportunity to tailor these antibodies and maximize their prevention and treatment potential. Broadly speaking, these bnAbs recognize six major "vulnerable sites" on the HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein gp160 (gp120 and gp41), which are (1) the CD4-binding site (CD4bs), (2) the V1V2 apex, (3) the V3 glycan, (4) the fusion peptide (FP), (5) subunit interface and (6) membrane proximal external region (MPER) of gp41[1-5]. These bnAbs neutralize HIV-1 by blocking viral entry into the target cells, although additional effector functions are likely at play, particularly in the context of in vivo infection and clinical application[1, 12-16]. Among the bnAbs isolated to date, those targeting the CD4bs are the most abundant and thoroughly studied as they disrupt the first and crucial step of viral interaction with the cellular receptor CD4 [3, 4, 17, 18] . In this step, the trimeric envelope glycoprotein, composed of gp120 and gp41, binds with the target cell through the receptor CD4, with either CCR5 or CXCR4 as co-receptor [19] [20] [21] . This triggers a cascade of conformational changes that fuses the viral envelope with the target membrane and releases the viral genome into the cell [22, 23] .More than two dozen CD4bs bnAbs have been isolated to date. This number is likely to grow with the advent of more specific and high-throughput techniques for isolating antibodies.For instance, the prototype VRC01 and its close relative VRC03, which effectively neutralize a panel of diverse pseudotyped viruses,were isolated from a clade-B infected individual [24] [25] [26] . The more recently isolated CD4bs bnAbs, such as 3BNC117, N6, N49P7, 3BNC60, VRC-PG04, VRC-PG20, NIH45-46, VRC-CH31, 12A12, CH103, 8ANC131, VRC13, and VRC16, have shown similar or even enhanced potency and breadth compared with VRC01 [1-5, 27, 28].The CD4bs bnAbs are classified into two groups based on their mode of recognition and heavy chain characteristics, such as the VRC01 class(3BNC117, N6, N49P7, 3BNC60, VRC-PG04, VRC-PG20, NIH45-46, VRC-CH31 and 12A12) and non-VRC01 classes (CH103, 8ANC131, VRC13 and VRC16) [17, 18] . Structurally, these bnAbs recognize residues within the inner domain, the Loop D, the CD4 binding loop, and the β23/loop V5/β24 region [17, 18, [29] [30] [31] .The V1V2 and V3 loop also impact recognition,particularly in the context of the quaternary trimeric envelope protein [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] .The primary mechanism of neutralization mimics and competes with the CD4 receptorto bind HIV-1 gp120, thereby preventing bound trimers from transitioning to the subsequent steps required for membrane fusion, although evidence indicates that there are differences in the fine details of this process [17, 18, 35, 36] . Despite the superior potency and breadth of these CD4bs bnAbs, each fails to neutralize a small but significant portion of pseudotyped virus panels [17, 25, 27, 28, 37, 38].For instance, VRC01 is unable to neutralize about 10% of tested viruses [25] , and resistant strains have been isolated from patients infected with subtype B, subtype C, CRF07_BC, and CRF08_BC[29, [39] [40] [41] [42] . Furthermore, reports show thatVRC01-, 3BNC117-and N6-resistant strains have emerged in both animal models and human clinical trials [11, 15, [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] , indicating that resistant virus Broadly resistant HIV-1 against CD4bs antibodies PLOS Pathogens | https://doi.org/10.
[EX A]: Broadly resistant HIV-1 against CD4-binding site neutralizing antibodies

[EX Q]: Clinical analysis often requires rapid, automated, and high-throughput analytical systems. Microchip capillary electrophoresis (CE) has the potential to achieve very rapid analysis (typically seconds), easy integration of multiple analytical steps, and parallel operation. Although it is currently still in an early stage of development, there are already many reports in the literature describing the applications of microchip CE in clinical analysis. At the same time, more fully automated and higher throughput commercial instruments for microchip CE are becoming available and are expected to further enhance the development of applications of microchip CE in routine clinical testing. To put into perspective its potential, we briefly compare microchip CE with conventional CE and review developments in this technique that may be useful in diagnosis of major diseases. Since the development of capillary electrophoresis on a chip (microchip CE) 3 in the early 1990s (1, 2 ), this technology has been a focus of research in chemical and biochemical analysis and has been reviewed extensively (3-32 ). Potential advantages of microchip CE include miniaturization, integration, high speed, and reduced reagent consumption. We present an overview of the approaches and selected applications of microchip CE devices in the diagnosis of major diseases, including cancer (33-41 ); cardiovascular (42-45 ), renal (46, 47 ), neurologic (48 -50 ), thyroid (51, 52 ), and infectious diseases (53-64 ); immune disorders (65-69 ); diabetes (70 -72 ); and hereditary diseases (73-77 ). We also briefly
[EX A]:
Clinical Analysis by Microchip Capillary Electrophoresis Review