Skip to main content
International Scholarly Research Notices logoLink to International Scholarly Research Notices
. 2014 Oct 29;2014:260379. doi: 10.1155/2014/260379

Global Stability of an HIV-1 Infection Model with General Incidence Rate and Distributed Delays

Abdoul Samba Ndongo 1,*, Hamad Talibi Alaoui 1
PMCID: PMC4897528  PMID: 27355007

Abstract

In this work an HIV-1 infection model with nonlinear incidence rate and distributed intracellular delays and with humoral immunity is investigated. The disease transmission function is assumed to be governed by general incidence rate f(T, V)V. The intracellular delays describe the time between viral entry into a target cell and the production of new virus particles and the time between infection of a cell and the emission of viral particle. Lyapunov functionals are constructed and LaSalle invariant principle for delay differential equation is used to establish the global asymptotic stability of the infection-free equilibrium, infected equilibrium without B cells response, and infected equilibrium with B cells response. The results obtained show that the global dynamics of the system depend on both the properties of the general incidence function and the value of certain threshold parameters R 0 and R 1 which depends on the delays.

1. Introduction

Immunity can be broadly categorized into adaptive immunity and innate immunity. Adaptive immunity is mediated by clonally distributed T and B lymphocytes, namely, humoral and cellular immunity, and is characterized by specificity and memory. The humoral immunity plays an important role in antiviral defence by attacking virus. A basic mathematical model describing HIV-1 infection dynamics model with humoral immunity was introduced by Murase et al. [1] as

dTtdt=ΛdTtβTtVt,dItdt=βTtVtδIt,dVtdt=NδItcVtqBtVt,dBtdt=gBtVtμBt, (1)

where T(t), I(t), V(t), and B(t) represent the densities of uninfected cells, infected cells, virus, and B cells at time t, respectively. Λ and d are the birth and death rate constants of uninfected cells. β is the infection rate, N is the average number of virus particles produced over the lifetime of a single infected cells, and δ is the death rate of infected cells; c is the death rate constant of the virus, g and μ are the recruited rate and death rate constants of B cells, and q is the B cells neutralization rate. Mathematical models for virus dynamics with antibody immune response has drawn much attention of researchers (see, e.g., [113] and the reference therein). Recently many studies have been done to improve the model (1) by introducing delays and changing the incidence rate according to different practical background. These studies used different delayed models with different forms of incidence rate; see, for example, [6, 911] for discrete delays and [5, 13] for distributed delays.

In the present paper, motivated by the works of [1, 5, 13], we propose the following model with a general incidence rate and distributed delays and humoral immunity:

dTtdt=ΛdTtfTt,VtVt,dItdt=0h1P1τem1τfTtτ,Vtτ×VtτdτδIt,dVtdt=Nδ0h2P2τem2τItτdτcV(t)qB(t)V(t),dBtdt=gBtVtμBt, (2)

where the parameters in system (2) have the same meanings as in system (1). f(T, V)V is the general incidence rate. It is assumed in (2) that the uninfected cells that are contacted by the virus particles at time tτ become infected cells at time t, where τ is distributed according to P 1(τ) over the interval [0, h 1], where h 1 is the limit superior of this delay. The constant m 1  (m 1 > 0) is assumed to be the death rate for infected cells during time period [tτ, t] but not yet virus-producing cells and the term e m1τ denotes the surviving rate of infected cells during the delay period. On the other hand, it is assumed in (2) that a cell infected at time tτ starts to yield new infectious virus at time t, where τ is distributed according to a probability distribution P 2(τ) over the interval [0, h 2] and h 2 is limit superior of this delay. The factor e m2τ accounts for the probability of surviving infected cells during the time period of delay, where m 2 is constant. In (2), the probability distribution functions P i(τ), i = 1,2, are assumed to satisfy P i(τ) > 0, i = 1,2 and

0hiPi(τ)dτ=1,0hiτPi(τ)dτ<,i=1,2. (3)

The function f is assumed to be continuously differentiable in the interior of IR + 2 and satisfies the following hypotheses:

  • (H1)

    f(0, V) = 0, for all V ≥ 0,

  • (H2)

    f(T, V)/∂T > 0, for all T > 0 and V ≥ 0,

  • (H3)

    f(T, V)/∂V ≤ 0, for all T > 0 and V ≥ 0.

  • (H4)

    ∂(f(T, V)V)/∂V ≥ 0, for all T, V > 0.

The biological meaning of hypothesis (H 1) to (H 4) is given in [10].

Note the following.

The incidence rate f(T, V)V given in (2) generalizes many common forms such as [5, 9, 13] (see Section 6).

The distributed delay is more general than the discrete one and it is more adapted to biological phenomena.

h 1 or h 2 can be infinity.

The present paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we establish the nonnegativity and boundedness of solutions and we derived the basic reproduction ratios for viral infection and humoral immune response R 0 and R 1, respectively. In Section 3, the existence of a possible three positive equilibria, an infection-free equilibrium E 0 *, an infected equilibrium without B cells response E 1 *, and an infected equilibrium with B cells response E 2 *, is established. In Sections 4 and 5, we show that the global asymptotic stability of these equilibria depend only on the basic reproduction numbers under some hypotheses on the incidence function. In Section 6, some examples are given. A brief discussion is given in the last section to conclude this paper.

2. Preliminary Results

The initial conditions of (2) are given as

Tθ=ϕ1θ,Iθ=ϕ2θ,  Vθ=ϕ3θ,Bθ=ϕ4θ,ϕiθ0,i=1,2,3,4,θh,0,  h=maxh1,h2, (4)

where ϕ = (ϕ 1, ϕ 2, ϕ 3, ϕ 4) ∈ C +, here C + = C(−h, 0], + 4), with C(−h, 0], 4); denotes the Banach space of continuous functions mapping the interval −h, 0] into 4.

Theorem 1 . —

Under the initial conditions (4), all solutions (T(t), I(t), V(t), B(t)) of system (2) are nonnegative on [0, + and bounded.

Proof —

Let us put system (2) in a vector form by setting Z = (T, I, V, B)T and

GZ=G1ZG2ZG3ZG3Z=ΛdTtfTt,VtVt0h1P1τem1τfTtτ,VtτVtτdτδItNδ0h2P2τem2τItτdτcVtqBtVtgBtVtμBt, (5)

where G : C +IR 4 and C + = {ϕ = (ϕ 1, ϕ 2, ϕ 3, ϕ 4) : ϕC([−h, 0], IR + 4)}. It is easy to check that G i(Z)∣Zi=0 ≥ 0, i = 1,2, 3,4. Due to [14, Lemma  2], any solution of (2) with Z(θ) ∈ C +, say Z(t) = Z(t, Z(θ)), is such that Z(t) ∈ IR + 4 for all t ≥ 0. Next we show that the solutions are also bounded. It follows from the first equation of (2) that dT/dt ≤ Λ − dT(t). This implies lim⁡ sup⁡t T(t) ≤ Λ/d, so T(t) is bounded.

Let

Ft=0h1P1τem1τTtτdτ+It. (6)

Then

dFtdt=Λ0h1P1τem1τdτd0h1P1τem1τTtτdτδItΛγFt, (7)

where γ = min⁡{d, δ} and thus lim⁡ sup⁡t F(t) ≤ Λ/γ. This implies that F(t) is bounded and so is I(t). Thus, there exists a χ > 0 such that I(t) ≤ χ. It follows from the third equations in (2) that

dVtdtNδχcVt, (8)

and consequently V(t) is bounded. On the other hand, let

Ht=Vt+qgBt. (9)

Then,

dHtdt=Nδ0h2P2τem2τItτdτcVtqμgBt. (10)

We have dH(t)/dtNδχξH(t), where ξ = min⁡{c, μ}; this implies that H(t) is bounded so also for B(t). Finally, all the solutions of system (2) are bounded. This completes the proof.

To simplify the notations we note that

k1=0h1P1τem1τdτ,k2=0h2P2τem2τdτ. (11)

Global behaviour of system (2) may depend on the basic reproduction numbers R 0 and R 1 given by

R0=Nk1k2fT0,0c, (12)

where T 0 * = Λ/d and

R1=Nk1k2f(M,μ/g)c, (13)

with, M = T 0 * − (μc/dNgk 1 k 2). Here, R 0 and R 1 are the basic reproduction ratios for viral infection and humoral immune response of system (2), respectively. Based on the hypotheses (H 2) and (H 3) it is clear that R 1 < R 0.

3. The Existence of Positive Equilibria

In this section we prove the existence of positive equilibrium. The system (2) always has an infection-free equilibrium E 0 * = (T 0 *, 0,0, 0). For other possible equilibriums, we have the following theorem.

Theorem 2 . —

Suppose that the conditions (H1)–(H3) are satisfied.

  • (1)

    If R 0 > 1, then system (2) has an infected equilibrium without B cells response of the form E 1 * = (T 1 *, I 1 *, V 1 *, 0) with T 1 * ∈ (0, T 0 *).

  • (2)

    If R 1 > 1, then system (2) has an infected equilibrium with B cells response of the form E 2 * = (T 2 *, I 2 *, V 2 *, B 2 *) with T 2 * ∈ (0, M).

Proof —

The steady states of system (2) satisfy the following equations:

ΛdTfT,VV=0,k1fT,VVδI=0,Nδk2IcVqBV=0,gBVμB=0. (14)

From the last equation of (14), we have

(gVμ)B=0. (15)

Equations (15) has two possible solutions, B = 0 or gVμ = 0.

If B = 0, (14)3 yields I = (c/Nδk 2)V.

By substituting this into (14)2, we obtain that

k1fT,VcNk2V=0, (16)

which gives V = 0 or k 1 f(T, V) − (c/Nk 2) = 0.

If V = 0, we obtain the infection-free equilibrium E 0 *(Λ/d, 0,0, 0).

If V ≠ 0, (14)1 and (14)2 yields

I=k1ΛdTδIT. (17)

By substituting this into (14)3, we obtain

V=Nk1k2(ΛdT)cV(T). (18)

Since I ≥ 0 and V ≥ 0, this implies that T ≤ Λ/d.

Now, from (H 1), (H 2), and (H 3), the following functional

KT=k1fT,VTcNk2, (19)

satisfies

K0KΛd=cNk22(R01)<0,forR0>1,K˙(T)=k1fTNdk1k2cfV>0. (20)

Hence, we obtain the infected equilibrium without B cells response

E1=T1,I1,V1,0=T1,IT1,VT1,0, (21)

where T 1 * is the unique zero in (0, T 0 *) of K and I and V are given by (17) and (18).

If B ≠ 0, from (15), we obtain

V=μgV2, (22)

and from the first and second equation of (14), we have

I=I(T)=k1ΛdTδ0. (23)

By substituting this into (14)3, we obtain

B=B(T)=dNgk1k2(MT)qμ0, (24)

which implies that TM.

Now, from (14)1 the functional

L(T)ΛdTfT,V2V2=0 (25)

satisfies

L0LM=ΛμcNgk1k21R1<0,forR1>1L˙(T)=μgfTd<0. (26)

Hence, we obtain the infected equilibrium with B cells response E 2 * = (T 2 *, I(T 2 *), V 2 *, B(T 2 *)), where T 2 * is the unique zero of L in (0, M) and I and B are given by (23) and (24), respectively. This completes the proof.

Remark 3 . —

From (19) we have K(M) = (c/Nk 2)(R 1 − 1) ≤ 0 if R 1 ≤ 1. So, as K is increasing in the interval [o, Λ/d], we deduces that MT 1 * and consequently V 1 * − (μ/g) ≤ 0.

4. Global Stability of the Infection-Free Equilibrium

In this section, we study the global stability of the infection-free equilibrium E 0 * of system (2).

Theorem 4 . —

Suppose that the conditions (H1)–(H3) are satisfied. Then the infection-free equilibrium E 0 * of system (2) is globally asymptotically stable if R 0 ≤ 1.

Proof —

Define a Lyapunov functional:

U0t=T0T1fT0,0fσ,0dσ+1k1I+1Nk1k2V+qNgk1k2B+1k10h1P1τem1τ×tτtfTσ,VσVσdσdτ+δk1k20h2P2τem2τtτtIσdσdτ, (27)

where k 1 and k 2 are given in (11).

It is obvious that U 0 is defined and continuously differentiable for all T, I, V, B > 0, and U 0 = 0 at E 0 *. The time derivative of U 0(t) along the solutions of system (2) is given by

U˙0=1fT0,0fT,0ΛdTfT,VV+1k10h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτδk1I+1Nk1k2Nδ0h2P2τem2τIτdτcVqBV+qNgk1k2gBVμB+1k10h1P1τem1τfT,VVfTτ,VτVτdτ+δk1k20h2P2τem2τIIτdτ, (28)

with T τ = T(tτ), T = T(t), I τ = I(tτ), I = I(t), V τ = V(tτ), V = V(t), and B = B(t).

At E 0 *, using Λ = dT 0 *, we obtain

U˙0=1fT0,0fT,0dT0dT+fT,VVfT0,0fT,0cNk1k2VμqNgk1k2B=d1fT0,0fT,0T0T+cNk1k2×fT,VfT,0Nk1k2fT0,0c1VμqNgk1k2B. (29)

From (H 2) and (H 3) we have, respectively,

1f(T0,0)f(T,0)T0T0,fT,VfT,0Nk1k2fT0,0cfT,0fT,0Nk1k2fT0,0c=Nk1k2fT0,0c=R0. (30)

Then, R 0 ≤ 1 ensures that U˙00, for all T, I, V, B ≥ 0, U˙0=0 holds only for T = T 0 *, V = B = 0, and from (2)2 we obtain I = 0. It follows that {E 0 *} is the largest invariant set in T,I,V,BU˙0=0. It follows from LaSalle invariance principle [15] that the infection-free equilibrium E 0 * is globally asymptotically stable.

5. Global Stability of the Infected Equilibria

In this section, we study the global stability of the infected equilibrium without B cells response E 1 * and the infected equilibrium with B cells response E 2 * of system (2) by the Lyapunov direct method.

We set

gx=x1lnx,forx0,. (31)

It is clear that for any x > 0, g(x) ≥ 0 and g(x) has the global minimum x = 1, with g(1) = 0.

Theorem 5 . —

Suppose that the conditions (H 1)–(H 4) are satisfied. Then the equilibrium E 1 * is globally asymptotically stable if R 1 ≤ 1 < R 0.

Proof —

Define a Lyapunov functional

U1=W1+W2, (32)

where

W1=T1T1fT1,V1fσ,V1dσ+1k1I1gII1+V1Nk1k2gVV1+qNgk1k2B,W2=1k1fT1,V1V10h1P1τem1τ×tτtgfTσ,VσVσfT1,V1V1dσdτ+δk1k2I10h2P2(τ)em2τtτtg(I(σ)I1)dσdτ, (33)

where k 1 and k 2 are given in (11).

The function U : T → ∫T1* T(1 − f(T 1 *, V 1 *)/f(σ, V 1 *)) verifies

U˙(T)=1f(T1,V1)f(T,V1). (34)

From (H 2), we have U˙(T)<0 for T ∈ (0, T 1 *), U˙(T)>0 for T ∈ (T 1 *, ), and U˙T1=0, so U(T) ≥ 0. Consequently U 1 is nonnegative defined with respect to the endemic equilibrium E 1 *, which is a global minimum.

We now prove that the time derivative of U 1 is nonpositive. Calculating the time derivative of W 1 along the positive solutions of (2), we obtain

W˙1=1f(T1,V1)f(T,V1)T˙+1k1(1I1I)I˙+1Nk1k21V1VV˙+qNgk1k2B˙=1fT1,V1fT,I1,V1(ΛdTf(T,V)V)+1k11I1I×0h1P1(τ)em1τf(Tτ,Vτ)VτdτδI+1Nk1k21V1V×Nδ0h2P2τem2τIτdτcVqBV+qNgk1k2gBVμB. (35)

At E 1 *, by using Λ = dT 1 * + f(T 1 *, V 1 *)V 1 * and c = Nδk 2 I 1 */V 1 * and δ/k 1 I 1 * = f(T 1 *, V 1 *)V 1 *, we have

W˙1=1f(T1,V1)f(T,V1)dT1dT+f(T1,V1)V11f(T1,V1)f(T,V1)f(T,V)V+fT1,V1fT,V1f(T,V)V+1k10h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτδk1I1k1I1I0h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτ+δk1I1+δk1k20h2P2τem2τIτdτδI1k1V1Vδk1k2V1V0h2P2(τ)em2τIτdτ+δk1I1+qNk1k2V1μgB. (36)

Calculating the time derivative of W 2, we obtain

W˙2=1k1fT1,V1V10h1P1τem1τ×fT,VVfT1,V1V1fTτ,VτVτfT1,V1V1hhh+lnfTτ,VτVτfT,VVdτ+δk1k2I10h2P2τem2τII1IτI1+lnIτIdτ=fT,VV1k10h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτ+1k1fT1,V1V10h1P1τem1τlnfTτ,VτVτfT,VVdτ+δk1Iδk1k20h2P2τem2τIτdτ+δk1k2I10h2P2τem2τlnIτIdτ. (37)

Combining (36) and (37) and by using (δ/k 1)I 1 * = f(T 1 *, V 1 *)V 1 *, we obtain

U˙1=1f(T1,V1)f(T,V1)dT1dT+f(T1,V1)V11f(T1,V1)f(T,V1)+f(T1,V1)f(T,V1)f(T,V)V1k1I1I0h1P1(τ)em1τf(Tτ,Vτ)Vτdτ+f(T1,V1)V1f(T1,V1)V1k2fT1,V1V1I1V1V0h2P2(τ)em2τIτdτ+f(T1,V1)V1+1k1f(T1,V1)V1×0h1P1(τ)em1τlnf(Tτ,Vτ)Vτf(T,V)Vdτ+1k2f(T1,V1)V10h2P2(τ)em2τlnIτIdτ+qNk1k2V1μgB=1fT1,V1fT,V1dT1dT+fT1,V1V1fT,V1fT,VVV1×1fT,VfT,V1+fT1,V1V1×1fT1,V1fT,V1+lnfT1,V1fT,V1+fT1,V1V11fT,V1fT,V+lnfT,V1fT,V+1k1f(T1,V1)V10h1P1(τ)em1τ×1fTτ,VτVτI1fT1,V1V1I+lnfTτ,VτVτI1fT1,V1V1Idτ+1k2f(T1,V1)V10h2P2(τ)em2τ×1IτV1I1V+lnIτV1I1Vdτ+qNk1k2V1μgB=d1f(T1,V1)f(T,V1)T1T+fT1,V1V1fT,V1fT,VVV11fT,VfT,V1f(T1,V1)V1g(fT1,V1fT,V1)f(T1,V1)V1g×fT,V1fT,V1k1f(T1,V1)V1×0h1P1(τ)em1τg(f(Tτ,Vτ)VτI1f(T1,V1)V1I)dτ1k2f(T1,V1)V10h2P2(τ)em2τgIτV1I1Vdτ+qNk1k2V1μgB. (38)

From (H 2), we have

1f(T1,V1)f(T,V1)T1T0, (39)

and from (H 3) and (H 4) we have

fT,V1fT,VVV11fT,VfT,V10, (40)

and as g is positive, we have

U˙1qNk1k2V1μgB. (41)

From Remark 3 we have U˙1t0 for all T, I, V, B ≥ 0. It is easy to verify that from (38), the largest invariant set in T,I,V,BU˙1t=0 is the singleton {E 1 *}. Using LaSalle invariance principle [15], if R 1 ≤ 1 < R 0, then the equilibrium E 1 * is globally asymptotically stable. This completes the proof.

Theorem 6 . —

Suppose that the conditions (H 1)–(H 4) are satisfied. Then the equilibrium E 2 * is globally asymptotically stable if R 1 > 1.

Proof —

Define a Lyapunov functional

U2=W3+W4, (42)

where

W3=T2T1fT2,V2fσ,V2dσ+1k1I2gII2+V2Nk1k2gVV2+qNgk1k2B2gBB2, (43)
W4=1k1fT2,V2V20h1P1τem1τ×tτtgfTσ,VσVσfT2,V2V2dσdτ+δk1k2I20h2P2τem2τtτtgIσI2dσdτ, (44)

where k 1 and k 2 are given in (11).

The function U : T → ∫T2* T(1 − (f(T 2 *, V 2 *)/f(σ, V 2 *))) verifies

U˙(T)=1f(T2,V2)f(T,V2). (45)

From (H 2), we have U˙(T)<0 for T ∈ (0, T 2 *), U˙(T)>0 for T ∈ (T 2 *, ), and U˙T2=0, so U(T) ≥ 0. Consequently U 2 is nonnegative defined with respect to the endemic equilibrium E 2 *, which is a global minimum.

We now prove that the time derivative of U 1 is nonpositive. Calculating the time derivative of W 1 along the positive solutions of (2), we obtain

W˙3=1fT2,V2fT,V2T˙+1k11I2II˙+1Nk1k21V2VV˙+qNgk1k21B2BB˙=1fT2,V2fT,I2,V2ΛdTfT,VV+1k11I2I0h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτδI+1Nk1k21V2VNδ0h2P2τem2τIτdτkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkcVqBV0h2+qNgk1k21B2BgBVμB. (46)

At E 2 *, by using Λ = dT 2 * + f(T 2 *, V 2 *)V 2 *, c = (Nδk 2 I 2 */V 2 *) − qB 2 *, and V 2 * = μ/g, we have

W˙3=1fT2,V2fT,V2dT2dT+fT2,V2V21fT2,V2fT,V2fT,VV+fT2,V2fT,V2fT,VV+1k10h1P1τem1τ×fTτ,VτVτdτδk1I+fT2,V2fT,V2fT,VV+1k10h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτδk1I1k1I2I0h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτ+δk1I2+δk1k20h2P2τem2τIτdτqNk1k2BVδk1k2V2V0h2P2τem2τIτdτ+qV2Nk1k2B1Nk1k2VV2Nδk2I2V2qB2+qNk2k2BB2VV2=1fT2,V2fT,V2dT2dT+fT2,V2V21fT2,V2fT,V2fT,VV+fT2,V2fT,V2fT,VV+1k10h1P1τem1τ×fTτ,VτVτdτδk1I+fT2,V2fT,V2fT,VV+1k10h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτδk1I1k1I2I0h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτ+δk1I2+δk1k20h2P2τem2τIτdτqNk1k2BVδk1k2V2V0h2P2τem2τIτdτ+qV2Nk1k2BδI2k1v2V+qB2Nk1k2V+δk1I2qV2B2Nk1k2+qNk1k2BVqV2Nk1k2BqB2Nk1k2V+qB2V2Nk1k2=1fT2,V2fT,V2dT2dT+fT2,V2V21fT2,V2fT,V2fT,VV+fT2,V2fT,V2fT,VV+1k10h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτδk1I1k1I2I0h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτ+δk1I2+δk1k20h2P2τem2τIτdτδI2k1V2Vδk1k2V2V0h2P2(τ)em2τIτdτ+δk1I2. (47)

Calculating the time derivative of W 4, we obtain

W˙4=1k1fT2,V2V20h1P1τem1τ×fT,VVfT2,V2V2fTτ,VτVτfT2,V2V2kkkkkk+lnfTτ,VτVτfT,VVdτ+δk1k2I20h2P2τem2τII2IτI2+lnIτIdτ=fT,VV1k10h1P1τem1τfTτ,VτVτdτ+1k1fT2,V2V20h1P1τem1τlnfTτ,VτVτfT,VVdτ+δk1Iδk1k20h2P2τem2τIτdτ+δk1k2I20h2P2(τ)em2τlnIτIdτ. (48)

Combining (47) and (48) and by using (δ/k 1)I 2 * = f(T 2 *, V 2 *)V 2 *, we obtain

U˙2=1fT2,V2fT,V2dT2dT+fT2,V2V21fT2,V2fT,V2+fT2,V2fT,V2fT,VV1k1I2I0h1P1τem1τ×fTτ,VτVτdτ+fT2,V2V2fT2,V2V1k2fT2,V2V2I2V2V×0h2P2τem2τIτdτ+fT2,V2V2+1k1fT2,V2V20h1P1τem1τ×lnfTτ,VτVτfT,VVdτ+1k2fT2,V2V2×0h2P2τem2τlnIτIdτ=1fT2,V2fT,V2dT2dT+fT2,V2V2fT,V2fT,VVV2×1fT,VfT,V2+fT2,V2V2×1fT2,V2fT,V2+lnfT2,V2fT,V2+fT2,V2V21fT,V2fT,V+lnfT,V2fT,V+1k1fT2,V2V20h1P1τem1τ×1fTτ,VτVτI2fT2,V2V2I+lnfTτ,VτVτI2fT2,V2V2Idτ+1k2fT2,V2V20h2P2τem2τ×1IτV2I2V+lnIτV2I2Vdτ=d1fT2,V2fT,V2T2T+fT2,V2V2×fT,V2fT,VVV21fT,VfT,V2fT2,V2V2gfT2,V2fT,V2fT2,V2V2gfT,V2fT,V1k1fT2,V2V20h1P1τem1τ×gfTτ,VτVτI2fT2,V2V2Idτ1k2f(T2,V2)V20h2P2(τ)em2τgIτV2I2Vdτ. (49)

From (H 2), we have

1f(T2,V2)f(T,V2)T2T0, (50)

and from (H 3) and (H 4) we have

f(T,V2)f(T,V)VV2(1f(T,V)f(T,V2))0, (51)

and as g is positive, we have

U˙20. (52)

Thus, the equilibrium E 2 * is stable. In this case, note that U˙2=0 if and only if T = T 2 *, I = I 2 *, and V = V 2 * and using the third equation of (2), we obtain B = B 2 *. Therefore, it follows from LaSalle's invariance principal [15] that the infected equilibrium with B cells response E 2 * is globally asymptotically stable. This completes the proof.

6. Application

In this section, we give some particular examples. In (2), if f(T, V) = (βT/(1 + αV)) we obtain the following model:

dTtdt=ΛdTtβTtVt1+αVt,dItdt=0h1P1τem1τβTtτVtτ1+αVtτdτδIt,dVtdt=Nδ0h2P2τem2τItτdτkkkkkkkkcVtqBtVt,dB(t)dt=gB(t)V(t)μB(t), (53)

The global dynamics of model (53) is studied by Elaiw et al. [5]. So the work presented in [5] is a particular case of (2) because the function (βT/(1 + αV)) satisfies the hypothesises (H 1)–(H 4).

Another particular case of (2), if f(T, V) = (βT/(1 + aV + bT)) and h 1 = h 2 = , we obtain the following model which is presented by Yang et al. [13]:

dTtdt=ΛdTtβTtVt1+aVt+bTt,dItdt=0P1τem1τβTtτVtτ1+aVtτ+bTtτdτδIt,dVtdt=Nδ0P2τem2τItτdτcVtkkkkkkkkqBtVt,dB(t)dt=gBtVtμBt. (54)

The global asymptotic stability of possible equilibrium of (54) is established in [13].

A last example, in (2), if f(T, V) = (βT/(1 + αV)) and P 1(τ) = P 2(τ) = δ(τ), where δ(·) is the Dirac delta function, we obtain the results presented in [6].

7. Conclusion

In the current paper, we have studied an HIV-1 infection model with humoral immune response and intracellular distributed delays and general incidence rate. The model has two distributed time delays describing time needed for infection of cell and virus replication. The global stability of our model is studied by employing the method of Lyapunov functionals which are motivated by McCluskey [16] for delayed epidemic models. This general incidence represents a variety of possible incidence functions that could be used in virus dynamics model as well as epidemic models. We establish that the global dynamics are determined by two threshold parameters, the basic reproduction ratios for viral infection and humoral immune response R 0 and R 1, respectively, which depend on the incidence function and the delay. We have proved that the infection-free equilibrium E 0 * is globally asymptotically stable if the basic reproduction ratios viral infection R 0 ≤ 1. In this case, the virus is cleared up. The hypotheses on the general incidence function are used to assure the existence of infected equilibrium without B cells response E 1 * and infected equilibrium with B cells response E 2 *. We prove that if R 1 ≤ 1 < R 0, the infected equilibrium without B cells response E 1 * is globally asymptotically stable and if R 1 > 1, the infected equilibrium with B cells response E 2 * is globally asymptotically stable.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for very helpful suggestions and comments.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

References

  • 1.Murase A., Sasaki T., Kajiwara T. Stability analysis of pathogen-immune interaction dynamics. Journal of Mathematical Biology. 2005;51(3):247–267. doi: 10.1007/s00285-005-0321-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Anderson R. M., May R. M., Gupta S. Non-linear phenomena in host-parasite interactions. Parasitology. 1989;99:S59–S79. doi: 10.1017/S0031182000083426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Arnaout R. A., Nowak M. A., Wodarz D. HIV-1 dynamics revisited: biphasic decay by cytotoxic T lymphocyte killing? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2000;267(1450):1347–1354. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Chiyaka C., Garira W., Dube S. Modelling immune response and drug therapy in human malaria infection. Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine. 2008;9(2):143–163. doi: 10.1080/17486700701865661. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Elaiw A. M., Alhejelan A., Alghamdi M. A. Global dynamics of virus infection model with antibody immune response and distributed delays. Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society. 2013;2013:9. doi: 10.1155/2013/781407.781407 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Huo H.-F., Tang Y.-L., Feng L.-X. A virus dynamics model with saturation infection and humoral immunity. International Journal of Mathematical Analysis. 2012;6(37–40):1977–1983. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Nowak M. A., Bangham C. R. M. Population dynamics of immune responses to persistent viruses. Science. 1996;272(5258):74–79. doi: 10.1126/science.272.5258.74. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Perelson A. S. Modelling viral and immune system dynamics. Nature Reviews Immunology. 2002;2(1):28–36. doi: 10.1038/nri700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Wang S., Zou D. Global stability of in-host viral models with humoral immunity and intracellular delays. Applied Mathematical Modelling. 2012;36(3):1313–1322. doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2011.07.086. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Wang T., Hu Z., Liao F., Ma W. Global stability analysis for delayed virus infection model with general incidence rate and humoral immunity. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation. 2013;89:13–22. doi: 10.1016/j.matcom.2013.03.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Wang X., Liu S. A class of delayed viral models with saturation infection rate and immune response. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences. 2013;36(2):125–142. doi: 10.1002/mma.2576. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Wodarz D., May R. M., Nowak M. A. The role of antigen-independent persistence of memory cytotoxic T lymphocytes. International Immunology. 2000;12(4):467–477. doi: 10.1093/intimm/12.4.467. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Yang Y., Wang H., Hu Z., Liao F. Global stability of in-host viral model with humoral immunity and Beddington-Deangelis functional response. International Journal of Life Science and Medical Research. 2013;3(5):200–209. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Yang X., Chen L., Chen J. Permanence and positive periodic solution for the single-species nonautonomous delay diffusive models. Computers & Mathematics with Applications. 1996;32(4):109–116. doi: 10.1016/0898-1221(96)00129-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.LaSalle J. P. The Stability of Dynamical Systems. Philadelphia, Pa, USA: SIAM; 1976. (Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics). [Google Scholar]
  • 16.McCluskey C. C. Complete global stability for an SIR epidemic model with delay—distributed or discrete. Nonlinear Analysis: Real World Applications. 2010;11(1):55–59. doi: 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2008.10.014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Scholarly Research Notices are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES