Search

This randomized, multicenter, double-blind parallel-group study was performed to evaluate the lipid-altering efficacy and safety of simvastatin 80 mg/day, a dose twice the current maximum recommended dose. At 20 centers in the United States, 521 male and female hypercholesterolemic patients were randomly assigned in a ratio of 2:3 to receive simvastatin 40 or 80 mg once daily, respectively, for 24 weeks in conjunction with a lipid-lowering diet. Patients met National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol criteria for pharmacologic treatment. The mean percentage reductions (95% confidence intervals) from baseline in LDL cholesterol averaged at weeks 18 and 24 were 38% (-40 to -36) and 46% (-47 to -45) for the 40- and 80-mg groups, respectively (p <0.001 between groups). One third of patients on the 40- and 80-mg doses achieved an LDL cholesterol reduction of 46% and > or = 53%, respectively. Decreases in apolipoprotein B, total cholesterol, and triglycerides were also significantly greater among patients receiving 80 mg/day. Simvastatin was well tolerated in both groups. Two patients (0.6%) in the 80-mg group developed myopathy. Consecutive, clinically significant hepatic transaminase elevations occurred in 3 (1.0%) and 6 (1.9%) patients in the 40- and 80-mg groups, respectively (p= 0.486). In conclusion, simvastatin 80 mg/day provided substantial reductions in LDL cholesterol, allowing most patients to reach their NCEP target levels; it also had an excellent safety and tolerability profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: At higher doses, simvastatin has been shown to produce significantly greater increases in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and apolipoprotein (apo) A-I than atorvastatin. To extend and confirm these findings, a 36-week, randomized, double-blind, dose-titration study was performed in 826 hypercholesterolemic patients to compare the effects of simvastatin and atorvastatin on HDL cholesterol, apo A-I, and clinical and laboratory safety. PRIMARY HYPOTHESIS: Simvastatin, across a range of doses, will be more effective than atorvastatin at raising HDL cholesterol and apo A-I levels., Methods: A total of 826 hypercholesterolemic patients were enrolled in this double-blind, randomized, parallel, 36-week, dose-escalation study. Patients randomized to simvastatin received 40 mg/day for the first 6 weeks, 80 mg/day for the next 6 weeks, and remained on 80 mg/day for the final 24 weeks. Patients randomized to atorvastatin received 20 mg/day for the first 6 weeks, 40 mg/day for the next 6 weeks, and 80 mg/day for the remaining 24 weeks., Results: During the first 12 weeks of the study, simvastatin increased HDL cholesterol and apo A-I more than the comparative doses of atorvastatin, while producing slightly lower reductions in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and triglycerides. At the maximal dose comparison, simvastatin 80 mg and atorvastatin 80 mg, the HDL cholesterol and apo A-I differences favoring simvastatin were larger than at the lower doses. In addition, at the maximal dose comparison, the incidence of drug-related clinical adverse experiences was approximately two-fold higher with atorvastatin 80 mg than with simvastatin 80 mg (23 versus 12%, p < 0.001), due predominantly to a greater incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms with atorvastatin (10 versus 3%, p < 0.001). The incidence of clinically significant alanine aminotransferase elevations was also higher with atorvastatin 80 mg than with simvastatin 80 mg (3.8 versus 0.5%, p < 0.010), especially in women (6.0 versus 0.6%)., Conclusions: At the doses compared in this study, simvastatin led to greater increases in HDL cholesterol and apo A-I levels than atorvastatin. At the maximum dose comparison, there were fewer drug-related gastrointestinal symptoms and clinically significant aminotransferase elevations with simvastatin.

Background and Aim: Clinical data suggesting that larger decreases in low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) result in greater reductions in coronary heart disease events have led to the establishment of aggressive LDL-C targets for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. In view of this, the efficacy and safety of a new maximum dose of simvastatin, 80 mg, were evaluated in 9 studies involving 2819 hypercholesterolemic patients. This report focuses on the combined results from the 4 main or Pivotal studies in which a total of 1936 patients received simvastatin 40 or 80 mg for 36 to 48 weeks., Methods and Results: The Pivotal studies had similar randomized, multicenter, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group designs. Their combined results demonstrated a significant advantage in the LDL-C-lowering effect for the 80 mg dose. At week 24, the mean percentage reductions (95% confidence intervals) from baseline in LDL-C for the 40 and 80 mg groups were -39.8% (-40.9, -38.7) and -45.7% (-46.5, -45.0) respectively (p < 0.001, between groups), and larger reductions in total cholesterol and triglycerides were also observed in the 80 mg group. Both doses were well tolerated. No new or unexpected adverse events were observed and the overall clinical event profiles were similar in the two groups. Clinically significant hepatic transaminase increases (> 3 times the upper limit of normal/ULN) and myopathy (muscle symptoms plus creatine kinase increase > 10 times ULN) occurred infrequently with both doses. Simvastatin 80 mg had a comparable efficacy and safety profile in women and men as well as in non-elderly and elderly patients., Conclusions: Simvastatin 80 mg provides additional LDL-C and triglyceride reductions compared to the 40 mg dose and has an excellent safety and tolerability profile.

Background: Elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol promote the development of atherosclerosis and coronary heart disease., Hypothesis: Simvastatin 80 mg/day will be more effective than simvastatin 40 mg/day at reducing LDL cholesterol and will be well tolerated., Methods: Two similar, randomized, multicenter, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, 48-week studies were performed to evaluate the long-term lipid-altering efficacy and safety of simvastatin 80 mg/day in patients with hypercholesterolemia. One study conducted in the US enrolled patients meeting the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) LDL cholesterol criteria for pharmacologic treatment. In the other multinational study, patients with LDL cholesterol levels > or = 4.2 mmol/l were enrolled. At 20 centers in the US and 19 countries world-wide, 1,105 hypercholesterolemic patients, while on a lipid-lowering diet, were randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:3 to receive simvastatin 40 mg (n = 436) or 80 mg (n = 669) once daily for 24 weeks. Those patients completing an initial 24-week base study were enrolled in a 24-week blinded extension. Patients who had started on the 80 mg dose in the base study continued on the same dose in the extension, while those who had started on the 40 mg dose were rerandomized at a 1:1 ratio to simvastatin 40 or 80 mg in the extension., Results: There was a significant advantage in the LDL cholesterol-lowering effect of the 80 mg dose compared with that of the 40 mg dose, which was maintained over the 48 weeks of treatment. The mean percentage reductions (95% confidence intervals) from baseline in LDL cholesterol for the 40 and 80 mg groups were 41% (42, 39) and 47% (48, 46), respectively, for the 24-week base study, and 41% (43, 39) and 46% (47, 45), respectively, after 48 weeks of treatment (p < 0.001 between groups). Larger reductions in total cholesterol and triglycerides were also observed with the 80 mg dose compared with the 40 mg dose at Weeks 24 and 48. Both doses were well tolerated, with close to 95% of patients enrolled completing the entire 48 weeks of treatment. Myopathy (muscle symptoms plus creatine kinase increase > 10 fold upper limit of normal) and clinically significant hepatic transaminase increases (> 3 times the upper limit of normal) occurred infrequently with both doses. There was no significant difference between the groups in the number of patients with such increases, although there were more cases for both with the 80 mg dose., Conclusions: Compared with the 40 mg dose, simvastatin 80 mg produced greater reductions in LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, and triglycerides. Both doses were well tolerated.

Patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (HFH) have abnormalities in both low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor alleles, resulting in severe hypercholesterolaemia and premature coronary heart disease. Limited treatment options are available and the response to drug therapy has been poor. In the present paper, we have evaluated the efficacy and safety of simvastatin at doses beyond the current maximal dose of 40 mg/day in patients with HFH. After a 4 week placebo diet run-in period, 12 patients with well-characterized HFH were randomized to simvastatin 80 mg/day administered in three divided doses (n = 8; group 1) or 40 mg once daily (n = 4; group 2). After 9 weeks, the dose in group 1 was increased to 160 mg/day while the dose in group 2 was kept at 40 mg/day, but with the drug given in three divided doses and treatment continued for an additional 9 weeks. All 12 patients completed the study and there were no serious or unexpected adverse effects. LDL-cholesterol concentrations fell by 14% at the 40 mg/day dose, but were reduced further at the higher doses (25% at the 80 mg/day and by 31% at the 160 mg/day dosage, P < 0.0001). Excretion of urinary mevalonic acid, as an index of in vivo cholesterol biosynthesis, was reduced but did not correlate with reduction in LDL-cholesterol in the individual patients. The magnitude of response to therapy was not predicted by the LDL-receptor gene defect as patients with the same LDL-receptor mutations responded differently to the same dose of simvastatin therapy. The ability of expanded doses of simvastatin (80 or 160 mg/day) to reduce LDL-cholesterol levels in patients with HFH, even if receptor negative, suggests that at these doses, the drug reduces LDL production. Simvastatin therapy, at doses of 80 or 160 mg/day, should therefore be considered in all patients with HFH, either as an adjunct to apheresis, or as monotherapy for those patients who do not have access to apheresis or other such treatment modalities.

The hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor simvastatin is the most effective of the currently approved hypolipidemic drugs and has been shown to reduce mortality and coronary morbidity in patients with coronary artery disease. For these patients the United States National Cholesterol Education Program advocates reducing low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol to <100 mg/dl. However, in some patients this cannot be achieved using monotherapy with simvastatin 40 mg/day, the current maximal recommended dose. To evaluate the effectiveness of extending the dosage range, 156 subjects with LDL cholesterol >160 mg/dl and triglycerides (TG) <350 mg/dl were randomized to simvastatin at doses of 40, 80, and 160 mg/day in a 26 week, double-blind, 3-period, complete block crossover study. Each active treatment period was 6 weeks in duration with intervening 2 week washout periods. Median reductions from baseline in LDL cholesterol were 41%, 47%, and 53% in the 40-, 80-, and 160-mg groups, respectively. The corresponding reductions in plasma TG were 21%, 23%, and 33%. High-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol increased by 6% to 8% in each group. One patient (0.7%) taking 160 mg developed myopathy; 1 patient (0.7%) taking 80 mg, and 3 (2.1%) taking 160 mg had transaminase elevations > 3 times the upper limit of normal. No new or unexpected adverse effects were observed. We conclude that simvastatin at doses of 80 and 160 mg/day provides additional efficacy with a low short-term incidence of adverse effects; our results support the continued investigation of simvastatin at these doses.

BACKGROUND: Combination lipid-lowering therapy may be desirable in patients with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high triglycerides, and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. This study was conducted to determine the lipid-lowering efficacy of the combination of low-dose simvastatin and niacin in patients with combined hyperlipidemia and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this multicenter, prospective, randomized trial, 180 patients with hypercholesterolemia and hypertriglyceridemia and/or low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were randomized to combination simvastatin (10 mg/day) and niacin (0.75 g/day) or to either drug alone for 9 weeks. The dose of niacin was doubled (from 0.75 g/day to 1.5 g/day) in both the combination and niacin arms for the remaining 8 weeks. The combination of simvastatin, 10 mg/day, and niacin, 1.5 g/day, reduced total, low-density lipoprotein, and very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides by 24%, 29%, 45%, and 31%, respectively, while increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 31%. The addition of niacin to simvastatin did not enhance the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 31%. The addition of niacin to simvastatin did not enhance the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol-lowering effect of simvastatin; however, the combination was more effective than either monotherapy at raising high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lowering very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P <.05). More patients discontinued treatment because of an adverse event in the niacin (P <.03) and combination groups (P =.06) than the simvastatin group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of patients with combined hyperlipidemia and/or low high-density lipoprotein with combination low-dose simvastatin and niacin resulted in large reductions in total, low-density lipoprotein, and very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and increases in HDL cholesterol. Although the combination was well tolerated in the current trial, its safety needs to be evaluated in larger trials of longer duration.

Suppression of cholesterol synthesis by 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors, such as lovastatin, has been shown to inhibit mitogen stimulated proliferation of natural killer (NK) cells and other lymphocytes in vitro. This effect is only partially overcome by provision of exogenous free or lipoprotein cholesterol but is reversed by mevalonate, suggesting that proliferating lymphocytes have a specific requirement for a nonsterol isoprenoid product of mevalonate. The effect of lovastatin (20 mg bid) on a range of immune function parameters was determined in a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind ex vivo study in 52 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. No significant differences (P < 0.05) were found between lovastatin and placebo groups for basal NK or interleukin-2 (IL-2)-induced cell-mediated cytotoxicity, PHA-stimulated lymphocyte proliferation, or relative numbers of T lymphocytes (CD3+), B lymphocytes (CD19+), total NK cells (CD3-, CD16+, CD56+) and CD57+ NK cells or in immunoglobulin levels after 4 or 8 weeks of treatment. In contrast to previous in vitro data, no statistically or clinically significant changes were observed in any parameter of lymphocyte function in patients treated with lovastatin.

In this report we have approached two questions relating to the mechanism of action of cyclosporin A (CsA). First, we address whether the major cytosolic protein for CsA, cyclophilin, is directly involved in mediating the immunosuppressive activity of this drug, and, in particular, whether inhibition of this protein's peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase (PPIase) activity results in inhibition of murine T cell activation. Second, we ask whether the nephrotoxicity observed with CsA is related to inhibition of PPIase-dependent pathways in cells other than lymphocytes. Using a series of 61 cyclosporin analogues, we generally found a good correlation between cyclophilin binding and immunosuppressive activity for the majority of analogues analyzed. However, a number of compounds of distinct structural classes were found that could interact with cyclophilin but were much less immunosuppressive than expected. The inability of these analogues to inhibit lymphocyte activation could not be explained by their failure to enter the cell and bind to cyclophilin under the conditions used in the cellular assays. Surprisingly, a nonimmunosuppressive analogue, MeAla-6, which bound well to cyclophilin and was active as a PPIase inhibitor, did not induce renal pathology in vivo. Furthermore, another analogue, MeBm2t, which was immunosuppressive in vitro, possessed little or no activity as a PPIase inhibitor. These findings pose serious questions concerning a direct role of cyclosporin in mediating CsA's immunosuppressive and nephrotoxic activities. In addition, they raise doubts about whether PPIase has a direct function in lymphocyte signal transduction.

The structurally related immunosuppressive macrolides FK-506 and rapamycin (RAP) were previously shown to inhibit T cell stimulation through different mechanisms. FK-506 acts similarly to cyclosporin A (CsA) and prevents IL-2 production and IL-2R expression. RAP has little or no effect on these events but markedly impedes the response to IL-2. The present study was initiated to examine the possibility of a complementation between the immunosuppressive actions of RAP and FK-506 or CsA on various murine T cell responses. RAP potentiated the effect of CsA on proliferation and IL-2R expression in T cells stimulated with ionomycin + PMA. However, in the same system, RAP acted as a potent antagonist of FK-506 suppression. RAP also blocked FK-506- but not CsA-mediated inhibition of IL-2 mRNA induction. By using model systems sensitive to inhibition by RAP but not FK-506 we further demonstrated that FK-506 reciprocally behaves as an antagonist of RAP. In one such model, the stimulation of splenic T cells with IL-2 + PMA, FK-506, but not CsA, reversed the suppressive effect of RAP on proliferation. FK-506 also antagonized RAP-mediated inhibition with respect to the induction of Ly-6E Ag expression by IFN in YAC cells. To explore further the competition between the two macrolides at the cellular level, we performed binding experiments with a radiolabeled derivative of FK-506. Both FK-506 and RAP, but not CsA, inhibited the binding of this probe in YAC cells. Taken together, these data demonstrate that FK-506 and RAP antagonize each other's biologic activity and physically interact with a common receptor site(s) in T cells. Moreover, CsA acts at a site distinct from the cellular target(s) of FK-506 or RAP.

FK-506 and the structurally related macrolide rapamycin (RAP) were investigated in comparison with cyclosporin A (CsA) for their immunosuppressive effects on murine T cells. All three agents suppressed the proliferation of splenic T cells triggered by lectins or antibodies to CD3 and Ly-6C. FK-506 or CsA also inhibited proliferation, IL-2 production, and IL-2R expression in splenic T cells activated with ionomycin + PMA. However, RAP minimally affected IL-2 production and IL-2R expression in these cells, although it reduced proliferation. Similarly, FK-506 and CsA, but not RAP, suppressed IL-2 production by activated DO.11.10 T hybridoma cells. In such a system, as well as in normal T cells stimulated with high ionomycin concentrations, FK-506 and CsA enhanced proliferation, indicating that they both abrogate negative signals associated with T cell activation. On the contrary, RAP diminished the autonomous proliferation of hybridoma cells, whereas FK-506 and CsA had little effect. The proliferative response induced in D10.G4 cells by IL-1 + ionomycin but not that induced by IL-1 + PMA was sensitive to inhibition by FK-506 and CsA. In contrast, RAP inhibited equally well both types of stimulation. Finally, T cell proliferation driven by IL-2 or IL-4 was found to be relatively resistant to FK-506 or CsA but sensitive to RAP. Altogether, these data demonstrate that FK-506 and CsA alter similar calcium-associated events of T cell activation and block T cell proliferation primarily by suppressing lymphokine production. RAP interferes with a different set of events and inhibits T cells by impairing their response to growth-promoting lymphokines.

Sequential immunoprecipitation analyses have defined a new transplantation antigen, designated R, which in addition to the 2 previously isolated D and L molecules is encoded in the D region. All 3 of these gene products are 45,000 m.w. glycoprotein, and each bears a unique combination of specificities as recognized by monoclonal and/or conventional anti-H-2 sera. Three D region products, D, L, and R, have now been isolated from soluble antigens of both the H-2d and H-2q haplotypes. The resulted reported here also indicate that the loss-mutant BALB/c-H-2dm2 fails to express both Ld and Rd antigens. Further chemical comparisons of the primary structure of R molecules with D and L molecules will now be necessary to determine whether R antigens are the products of a unique gene, as opposed to a glycosylation or conformational variant of D and/or L molecules. In either case, the discovery of 3 D region-encoded gene products in certain haplotypes raises new questions about the evolution and regulation of expression of H-2 loci.

In order to establish whether CyP is the pharmacologically relevant CsA receptor, the CyP binding v immunosuppressive activity was measured for an extensive, structurally varied group of CsA analogues. Overall, CyP binding was found to parallel immunosuppressive activity. Other than MeAla6-CsA, the few exceptions to the correlation could be ascribed to cellular metabolism. These results strongly implicate CyP or a related protein in the mechanism of action of cyclosporine.

In this report we describe the reactivity patterns of two monoclonal anti-Ly-6.2 antibodies toward lymph node (LN) cells of the autoimmune MRL/Mp-lpr/lpr (lpr) and the normal congenic MRL/Mp-+/+ (+/+) mouse strains. The monoclonal antibody 34-11-3, which has previously been found to detect a LN-associated Ly-6.2 antigen, reacted with both lpr and +/+ LN cells. Another monoclonal antibody, 34-10-7, which has been demonstrated to detect a bone marrow- (BM) associated determinant, was found to react with a small proportion of +/+ LN cells and unexpectedly with a high percentage of lpr LN cells. The expression of this BM determinant found in the LN of lpr mice was age dependent, and its presence on Thy-1.2+ cells increased with the expansion of a subset of Lyt-1+2- cells. In contrast, dual labeling experiments showed that in +/+ and young lpr mice a small subset of Lyt-1+2+ cells express this BM-associated Ly6.2 determinant. Therefore these findings demonstrate that the lpr gene-dependent T cell expansion in the LN results in both aberrant expression and association of lymphocyte cell surface markers.

Investigation of the molecular heterogeneity of H-2Db region antigens by using monoclonal antibodies and complex alloantisera has yielded evidence for the existence of only one gene product in this region. Sequential immunoprecipitation and isoelectric focusing analysis suggest that the private H-2.m2 and public H-2.m64 specificities defined by monoclonal or alloantibodies are present on the same molecule. Blocking studies with these reagents indicate these specificities represent two determinants spatially separated on the H-2Db molecule. Functional studies suggest that effector T cells may be generated against both of these determinants or closely associated epitopes, but the majority of the T cells recognize an epitope associated with or identical to the private specificity H-2.m2. Studies of the D region-encoded products of haplotypes besides H-2b have shown two or more distinct molecules can be detected by anti-H-2.m64 in both the H-2d and H-2q haplotypes. The presence of H-2.m64 on a single Db molecule is unique and gives further evidence for the lack of other gene products encoded in this region. Speculations based on the molecular heterogeneity of the D region gene products are made concerning the evolution and genetic organization of H-2 genes.

Initial studies of antibody recognition of Ia molecules using the IA mutant mouse strain bm12 suggested that two anti-Ia monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), 25-9-17 and 34-5-3, share several features: (1) indistinguishable serologic specificity including a lack of reactivity with Iabm12, (2) binding of the same spatial epitope (cluster), and (3) definition of a cross-reactive idiotype (CRI) as defined by xenogeneic antisera. In the present study we characterize a rabbit anti-idiotype (anti-Id) to 25-9-17 by affinity chromatography, and demonstrate that it detects at least two distinct idiotopes, one shared by 25-9-17 and 34-5-3 designated CRI (25-9-17) and one unique for 25-9-17 molecules. Experiments were also undertaken to determine whether CRI (25-9-17) represents a measurable component of allogeneic humoral responses to Iab antigens. By both absorption analyses of a polyspecific antiserum and production of antigenically-restricted antisera using bm12 mice, CRI (25-9-17) was found to represent a significant proportion of the antibodies to Iab. By several criteria it was shown that the CRI (25-9-17)+ molecules were among the antibodies defining the serologic lesion of bm12 mice. In preparation for future studies to alter in vivo T-cell responses involving recognition of Ia (e.g. graft vs host disease and allogeneic transplant rejection), various immunization protocols and mouse strains were tested for induction of Id (25-9-17) following in vivo administration of various anti-idiotypic reagents. Rabbit anti-Id (25-9-17) successfully induced CRI (25-9-17) positive molecules in all strains tested regardless of IA or Ig genotype. Moreover, some of these treated mice produced antibodies to an Ia determinant missing on bm12 cells, suggesting that they recognize the same serologic determinant as mAb 25-9-17.

The serologic lesion of the I-A mutant mouse strain, bm12, was investigated with the use of monoclonal anti-Iab antibodies and anti-idiotypic (Id) reagents produced against these antibodies. In a fluorometric analysis, three different monoclonal anti-Iab antibodies (25-9-17, 34-5-3, 28-16-8) failed to bind bm12 cells, whereas two anti-Iab antibodies (25-5-16 and 17/227), which bound bm12 cells, showed about one-half the fluorescence intensity that they showed in binding to Iab antigens. Of the three monoclonal antibodies that failed to react with bm12 cells, two antibodies (25-9-17 and 34-5-3) were found to bind the same steric site on Iab molecules (cluster I). In contrast, the antibodies (25-5-16 and 17/227) that reacted with both Iab and Iabm12 antigens were found to bind a second distinct site (cluster II). The binding of antibody 28-16-8 to Iab antigens inhibited reciprocally the binding of cluster I and II anti-Iab antibodies, suggesting a possible third site, sterically located intermediate between the other two sites. To assess the relatedness of the antibodies defining the serologic lesion of bm12 mice, xenogeneic and syngeneic anti-Id reagents were produced against antibodies 25-9-17 and 28-16-8. By using these anti-Ids in a binding site-related inhibition assay, a cross-reactive idiotype was detected that is shared by 25-9-17 and 34-5-3 antibodies; thus these two monoclonal antibodies share several features, including 1) idiotypic determinants, 2) failure to bind bm12 cells, 3) binding the same spatial Iab site, and 4) having indistinguishable serologic fine specificity that corresponds with a previously defined predominant alloantigenic determinant recognized in the bm12 anti-Iab humoral response. Therefore, several parameters of antibody recognition of Ia can now be correlated with structural changes in Ia molecules. These findings will potentiate future studies of the T cell recognition of these same Ia epitopes.