You can usually find a link by posting "key words used" and name the browser. Do not go too far off the first page of hits. Or you can post the link and put in the word "DOT" in place of the (.). If the site is not too complicated, it should come up.
Twiz, I finally had a chance to read this article. I think your impression is correct. I needed to finish a full cup of coffee and relocate out of a hot room to make it through this. Disclaimer: Immunology is not my area of medical expertise.
I don't believe this adds too much to what we know about INO. The authors basically wrote an independent review of the DNA vaccine approach, and how things have evolved to put them back in the limelight. It does appear that they favor a prime-boost strategy coupled with electroporation. They also stated repeated that eliciting the humoral (antibody) and cytotoxic (killer T, etc) cellular response will be key to a successful vaccine. They cited the fact that those that don't progress with HIV disease have higher cyctotoxic T cell responses. They seemed hopeful that the DNA vaccine approach will be successful in the management of HIV and other diseases.
Again, since I'm not an immunologist, my opinion doesn't really matter. However, I like the fact that they included actual human experience (non-progressors) to strengthen their argument. I think INO is on to something, but they will need big funding from a 3rd party to have a chance to get HIV across the goalline. I think this upcoming data will be key. GLTA.