Chemokine Coreceptor Usage by Diverse Primary Isolates of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1

We tested chemokine receptor subset usage by diverse, well-characterized primary viruses isolated from peripheral blood by monitoring viral replication with CCR1, CCR2b, CCR3, CCR5, and CXCR4 U87MG.CD4 transformed cell lines and STRL33/BONZO/TYMSTR and GPR15/BOB HOS.CD4 transformed cell lines. Primary viruses were isolated from 79 men with confirmed human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection from the Chicago component of the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study at interval time points. Thirty-five additional well-characterized primary viruses representing HIV-1 group M subtypes A, B, C, D, and E and group O and three primary simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) isolates were also used for these studies. The restricted use of the CCR5 chemokine receptor for viral entry was associated with infection by a virus having a non-syncytium-inducing phenotype and correlated with a reduced rate of disease progression and a prolonged disease-free interval. Conversely, broadening chemokine receptor usage from CCR5 to both CCR5 and CXCR4 was associated with infection by a virus having a syncytium-inducing phenotype and correlated with a faster rate of CD4 T-cell decline and progression of disease. We also observed a greater tendency for infection with a virus having a syncytium-inducing phenotype in men heterozygous for the defective CCR5 Δ32 allele (25%) than in those men homozygous for the wild-type CCR5 allele (6%) (P = 0.03). The propensity for infection with a virus having a syncytium-inducing phenotype provides a partial explanation for the rapid disease progression among some men heterozygous for the defective CCR5 Δ32 allele. Furthermore, we did not identify any primary viruses that used CCR3 as an entry cofactor, despite this CC chemokine receptor being expressed on the cell surface at a level commensurate with or higher than that observed for primary peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Whereas isolates of primary viruses of SIV also used STRL33/BONZO/TYMSTR and GPR15/BOB, no primary isolates of HIV-1 used these particular chemokine receptor-like orphan molecules as entry cofactors, suggesting a limited contribution of these other chemokine receptors to viral evolution. Thus, despite the number of chemokine receptors implicated in viral entry, CCR5 and CXCR4 are likely to be the physiologically relevant chemokine receptors used as entry cofactors in vivo by diverse strains of primary viruses isolated from blood.     

Linkage of Amino Acid Variation and Evolution of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 gp120 Envelope Glycoprotein (Subtype B) with Usage of the Second Receptor

To clarify the relationship between the amino acid variations of the gp120 of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and the chemokine receptors that are used as the second receptor for HIV, we evaluated amino acid site variation of gp120 between the X4 strains (use CXCR4) and the R5 strains (use CCR5) from 21 sequences of subtype B. Our analysis showed that residues 306 and 322 in the V3 loop and residue 440 in the C4 region were associated with usage of the second receptor. The polymorphism at residue 440 is clearly associated with the usage of the second receptor: The amino acid at position 440 was a basic amino acid in the R5 strains, and a nonbasic and smaller amino acid in the X4 strains, while the V3 loop of the X4 strains was more basic than that of the R5 strains. This suggests that residue 440 in the C4 region, which is close to the V3 loop in the three-dimensional structure, is critical in determining which second receptor is used. Analysis of codon frequency suggests that, in almost all cases, the difference at residue 440 between basic amino acids in the R5 strains and nonbasic amino acids in the X4 strains could be due to a single nucleotide change. These findings predict that the evolutionary changes in amino acid residue 440 may be correlated with evolutionary changes in the V3 loop. One possibility is that a change in electric charge at residue 440 compensates for a change in electric charge in the V3 loop. The amino acid polymorphism at position 440 can be useful to predict the cell tropism of a strain of HIV-1 subtype B.     

Alterations in the Immunogenic Properties of Soluble Trimeric Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Envelope Proteins Induced by Deletion or Heterologous Substitutions of the V1 Loop

HIV-1 gp140 envelope immunogens express conserved epitopes that are targeted by broadly cross-reactive neutralizing antibodies, but they fail to elicit similar antibodies upon immunization. The poor immunogenicity of conserved epitopes on gp140 could be linked to the high immunogenicity of variable Env regions on such constructs. Previous studies have shown that the first hypervariable region (V1 loop) is immunogenic on soluble gp140s but elicits type-specific antibodies. To address issues related to the high immunogenicity of the V1 loop, two conceptually opposite approaches were tested. In the first approach, we eliminated the V1 loop from our gp140 construct and examined how V1 deletion altered the immunogenic properties of other Env regions. In the second approach, we took advantage of the high immunogenicity of the V1 loop and engrafted four diverse V1 loops onto a common gp140 Env “scaffold.” These four scaffolds were used as a cocktail of immunogens to elicit diverse anti-V1 antibodies, under the hypothesis that eliciting diverse anti-V1 antibodies would expand the neutralizing breadth of immune sera. Our study indicates that three of four heterologous V1 loops were immunogenic on the common Env backbone “scaffold,” but heterologous anti-V1 neutralizing responses were observed in only one case. Both types of V1 modification dampened the immunogenicity of the V3 loop, differentially altered the immunogenicity of the transmembrane gp41 subunit, and altered the relative immunogenicities of unknown Env regions, including potentially the CD4-binding site (CD4-bs) and trimer-specific targets, which elicited cross-reactive neutralizing antibodies but of limited breadth.An effective vaccine against human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) will need to incorporate an envelope-derived immunogen capable of eliciting potent and broadly cross-reactive neutralizing antibody responses against diverse primary HIV-1 isolates. The target of anti-HIV neutralizing antibodies (NAbs), the viral envelope (Env) glycoprotein, is expressed as a single transmembrane polypeptide precursor (gp160) that is glycosylated and cleaved into an extracellular subunit (gp120) and a transmembrane subunit (gp41) during intracellular processing (10, 20, 21, 54). The functional Env form on virion surfaces is a trimer composed of three noncovalently associated gp120-gp41 heterodimers. Soluble forms of the trimeric Env have been generated by introducing stop codons immediately upstream of the transmembrane domain of gp41. These constructs are commonly referred to as gp140 proteins and have been tested extensively as immunogens to elicit anti-HIV-1 NAbs. Soluble gp140s express epitopes that are targets of NAbs, including cross-reactive NAbs such as b12, 4E10, and 2G12 (5, 17, 34, 45, 47, 49, 50, 52, 57). Immunization with gp140 immunogens nonetheless does not result in a broadly cross-reactive neutralizing antibody response (2, 3, 17, 18, 26, 56, 58).Epitope mapping analyses of the Abs elicited by soluble trimeric gp140 immunogens revealed that a large fraction of the gp140-induced neutralization response targets the first hypervariable region of gp120 (the V1 loop). In our hands, ∼40 to 70% of the neutralizing activity of sera from animals immunized with SF162 gp140 constructs is due to anti-V1 antibodies (17). In a study by Li et al. with YU2 gp140 (30) and a study by Wu et al. with HxB2/BaL gp145 (56), ∼10 to 80% of anti-YU2 neutralizing activity and 100% of anti-HxB2 neutralizing activity, respectively, were due to anti-V1 Abs. These anti-V1 Abs, however, are not cross-reactive. Previously, we also demonstrated that the diverse positionings of the V1 across heterologous strains limit access of broadly cross-reactive monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) to their targets (12).Here, taking into consideration the V1 loop''s high immunogenicity, we employed two opposing approaches aimed at the elicitation of cross-reactive neutralizing antibody responses to HIV-1. In the first approach, we deleted the V1 loop on our soluble trimeric gp140 construct (ΔV1SF162 gp140) and examined whether and how this modification altered the immunogenic properties of other Env regions. In the second approach, we substituted the V1 loop on our SF162 gp140 construct with the V1 loops from four heterologous HIV-1 viruses (89.6, YU2, JRFL, and HxB2) that differ in their amino acid compositions and in the number of potential N-linked glycosylation sites (PNGs). These four heterologous viruses display various neutralization phenotypes (7) and coreceptor utilization profiles (15, 35, 36, 48, 51). A total of four SF162 Env-based gp140 “scaffolds” expressing four different V1 loops were created and used as immunogens in a cocktail to test as a “proof of principle” the hypothesis that if diverse V1 loops are presented to the immune system simultaneously, the elicitation of anti-V1 NAbs with diverse specificities would broaden the overall neutralizing activity of immune sera. We also immunized animals with each of the four V1 chimeric scaffolds individually to ensure that all V1 loops were immunogenic when presented on the heterologous SF162 Env background.All immunogens (including wild-type [WT] SF162 gp140 and ΔV1SF162 gp140) elicited homologous anti-SF162 NAbs. All immunogens except the scaffold construct expressing the YU2 V1 also elicited heterologous NAbs against the sensitive lab-adapted strain HxB2. The heterologous YU2, 89.6, and HxB2 V1 loops, but not the JRFL V1 loop, were immunogenic on the background of the SF162 Env scaffold. However, only anti-V1 neutralizing activity against the HxB2 virus was observed. Although neither approach resulted in the development of broad anti-HIV-1 cross-neutralizing antibody responses, cross-neutralizing antibody responses of narrow breadth were elicited. These responses were not due to antibodies that target to variable regions of gp120 but were due to antibodies that target either epitopes of the CD4-binding site (CD4-bs) or epitopes that are not present on monomeric gp120. These observations have implications for guiding rational Env-based immunogen design and for potentially eliciting broadly cross-reactive NAb responses.     

Neutralization Profiles of Primary Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Isolates in the Context of Coreceptor Usage

Most strains of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) which have only been carried in vitro in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (primary isolates) can be neutralized by antibodies, but their sensitivity to neutralization varies considerably. To study the parameters that contribute to the differential neutralization sensitivity of primary HIV-1 isolates, we developed a neutralization assay with a panel of genetically engineered cell lines (GHOST cells) that express CD4, one of eight chemokine receptors which function as HIV-1 coreceptors, and a Tat-dependent green fluorescent protein reporter cassette which permits the evaluation and quantitation of HIV-1 infection by flow cytometry. All 21 primary isolates from several clades could grow in the various GHOST cell lines, and their use of one or more coreceptors could easily be defined by flow cytometric analysis. Ten of these primary isolates, three that were CXCR4 (X4)-tropic, three that were CCR5 (R5)-tropic, and four that were dual- or polytropic were chosen for study of their sensitivity to neutralization by human monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies. Viruses from the X4-tropic category of viruses were first tested since they have generally been considered to be particularly neutralization sensitive. It was found that the X4-tropic virus group contained both neutralization-sensitive and neutralization-resistant viruses. Similar results were obtained with R5-tropic viruses and with dual- or polytropic viruses. Within each category of viruses, neutralization sensitivity and resistance could be observed. Therefore, sensitivity to neutralization appears to be the consequence of factors that influence the antibody-virus interaction and its sequelae rather than coreceptor usage. Neutralization of various viruses by the V3-specific monoclonal antibody, 447-52D, was shown to be dependent not only on the presence of the relevant epitope but also on its presentation. An epitope within the envelope of a particular virus is not sufficient to render a virus sensitive to neutralization by an antibody that recognizes that epitope. Moreover, conformation-dependent factors may overcome the need for absolute fidelity in the match between an antibody and its core epitope, permitting sufficient affinity between the viral envelope protein and the antibody to neutralize the virus. The studies indicate that the neutralization sensitivity of HIV-1 primary isolates is a consequence of the complex interaction between virus, antibody, and target cell.     

Amino-Terminal Substitutions in the CCR5 Coreceptor Impair gp120 Binding and Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Entry

The CC-chemokine receptor CCR5 is required for the efficient fusion of macrophage (M)-tropic human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) strains with the plasma membrane of CD4⁺ cells and interacts directly with the viral surface glycoprotein gp120. Although receptor chimera studies have provided useful information, the domains of CCR5 that function for HIV-1 entry, including the site of gp120 interaction, have not been unambiguously identified. Here, we use site-directed, alanine-scanning mutagenesis of CCR5 to show that substitutions of the negatively charged aspartic acid residues at positions 2 and 11 (D2A and D11A) and a glutamic acid residue at position 18 (E18A), individually or in combination, impair or abolish CCR5-mediated HIV-1 entry for the ADA and JR-FL M-tropic strains and the DH123 dual-tropic strain. These mutations also impair Env-mediated membrane fusion and the gp120-CCR5 interaction. Of these three residues, only D11 is necessary for CC-chemokine-mediated inhibition of HIV-1 entry, which is, however, also dependent on other extracellular CCR5 residues. Thus, the gp120 and CC-chemokine binding sites on CCR5 are only partially overlapping, and the former site requires negatively charged residues in the amino-terminal CCR5 domain.     

Critical Amino Acids within the Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Envelope Glycoprotein V4 N- and C-Terminals Contribute to Virus Entry

The importance of the fourth variable (V4) region of the human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) envelope glycoprotein (Env) in virus infection has not been well clarified, though the polymorphism of this region has been found to be associated with disease progression to acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). In the present work, we focused on the correlation between HIV-1 gp120 V4 region polymorphism and the function of the region on virus entry, and the possible mechanisms for how the V4 region contributes to virus infectivity. Therefore, we analyzed the differences in V4 sequences along with coreceptor usage preference from CCR5 to CXCR4 and examined the importance of the amino acids within the V4 region for CCR5- and CXCR4-tropic virus entry. In addition, we determined the influence of the V4 amino acids on Env expression and gp160 processing intracellularly, as well as the amount of Env on the pseudovirus surface. The results indicated that V4 tended to have a shorter length, fewer potential N-linked glycosylation sites (PNGS), greater evolutionary distance, and a lower negative net charge when HIV-1 isolates switched from a coreceptor usage preference for CCR5 to CXCR4. The N- and C-terminals of the HIV-1 V4 region are highly conserved and critical to maintain virus entry ability, but only the mutation at position 417 in the context of ADA (a R5-tropic HIV-1 strain) resulted in the ability to utilize CXCR4. In addition, 390L, 391F, 414I, and 416L are critical to maintain gp160 processing and maturation. It is likely that the hydrophobic properties and the electrostatic surface potential of gp120, rather than the conformational structure, greatly contribute to this V4 functionality. The findings provide information to aid in the understanding of the functions of V4 in HIV-1 entry and offer a potential target to aid in the development of entry inhibitors.     

V3 Recombinants Indicate a Central Role for CCR5 as a Coreceptor in Tissue Infection by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1

Binding of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) envelope glycoprotein gp120 to both CD4 and one of several chemokine receptors (coreceptors) permits entry of virus into target cells. Infection of tissues may establish latent viral reservoirs as well as cause direct pathologic effects that manifest as clinical disease such as HIV-associated dementia. We sought to identify the critical coreceptors recognized by HIV-1 tissue-derived strains as well as to correlate these coreceptor preferences with site of infection and dementia diagnosis. To reconstitute coreceptor use, we cloned HIV-1 envelope V3 sequences encoding the primary determinants of coreceptor specificity from 13 brain-derived and 6 colon-derived viruses into an isogenic (NL4-3) viral background. All V3 recombinants utilized the chemokine receptor CCR5 uniformly and efficiently as a coreceptor but not CXCR4, BOB/GPR15, or Bonzo/STRL33. Other receptors such as CCR3, CCR8, and US28 were inefficiently and variably used as coreceptors by various envelopes. CCR5 without CD4 present did not allow for detectable infection by any of the tested recombinants. In contrast to the pathogenic switch in coreceptor specificity frequently observed in comparisons of blood-derived viruses early after HIV-1 seroconversion and after onset of AIDS, the characteristics of these V3 recombinants suggest that CCR5 is a primary coreceptor for brain- and colon-derived viruses regardless of tissue source or diagnosis of dementia. Therefore, tissue infection may not depend significantly on viral envelope quasispeciation to broaden coreceptor range but rather selects for CCR5 use throughout disease progression.     

Heterosexual Transmission of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Subtype C: Macrophage Tropism,Alternative Coreceptor Use,and the Molecular Anatomy of CCR5 Utilization

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 transmission selects for virus variants with genetic characteristics distinct from those of donor quasispecies, but the biological factors favoring their transmission or establishment in new hosts are poorly understood. We compared primary target cell tropisms and entry coreceptor utilizations of donor and recipient subtype C Envs obtained near the time of acute infection from Zambian heterosexual transmission pairs. Both donor and recipient Envs demonstrated only modest macrophage tropism, and there was no overall difference between groups in macrophage or CD4 T-cell infection efficiency. Several individual pairs showed donor/recipient differences in primary cell infection, but these were not consistent between pairs. Envs had surprisingly broad uses of GPR15, CXCR6, and APJ, but little or no use of CCR2b, CCR3, CCR8, GPR1, and CXCR4. Donors overall used GPR15 better than did recipients. However, while several individual pairs showed donor/recipient differences for GPR15 and/or other coreceptors, the direction of the differences was inconsistent, and several pairs had unique alternative coreceptor patterns that were conserved across the transmission barrier. CCR5/CCR2b chimeras revealed that recipients as a group were more sensitive than were donors to replacement of the CCR5 extracellular loops with corresponding regions of CCR2b, but significant differences in this direction were not consistent within pairs. These data show that sexual transmission does not select for enhanced macrophage tropism, nor for preferential use of any alternative coreceptor. Recipient Envs are somewhat more constrained than are donors in flexibility of CCR5 use, but this pattern is not universal for all pairs, indicating that it is not an absolute requirement.A majority of new human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infections are initiated by only a single genetic species, although in some, several closely related variants are transmitted (19, 26, 34, 44, 55). Nevertheless, in all cases, a molecular bottleneck occurs during transmission (8, 15, 22, 33, 56). This bottleneck does not appear to be simply a stochastic result of low-efficiency transmission since viral sequences in recipients do not typically reflect the majority sequences in donors, even in genital secretions responsible for transmission (22, 56). Identifying the biological factors that favor particular variants in transmission and/or establishment in new hosts is essential both to understanding the mechanisms of transmission and to developing approaches, including vaccines and microbicides, that might interrupt transmission.More than 15 years ago, it was recognized that new infections were nearly always initiated by HIV-1 variants that were macrophage tropic and non-syncytium inducing (NSI) in T-cell lines, even though donors often harbored variants that were syncytium inducing (SI) and non-macrophage tropic (55). The molecular basis for these characteristics was subsequently linked to use of the entry coreceptor CCR5 by macrophage-tropic/NSI transmitted variants (R5 strains), with exclusion of T-cell-line-tropic/SI or dual-tropic variants that use CXCR4 (X4 or R5X4 strains). The critical role for CCR5-using strains in transmission is underscored by the fact that individuals who genetically lack CCR5 expression are highly resistant to HIV-1 infection (32, 49). Many potential mechanisms have been offered to explain the requirement for CCR5-mediated transmission, including R5 infection of macrophages at sites of transmission, preferential uptake by dendritic cells at mucosal sites, selective transcytosis by epithelial cells, or greater susceptibility of CCR5-rich memory T lymphocytes that are the main reservoir for viral amplification during acute infection (reviewed in reference 35). However, the virus-cell interactions that underlie this powerful restriction remain to be defined.Even among transmission pairs in which donors harbored only R5 variants, however, genetic selection at transmission indicates that selective forces beyond just CCR5 use appear to be operative. In a cohort of serodiscordant Zambian couples infected with subtype C HIV-1 followed prospectively, in which transmission subsequently occurred, the gp120 envelope glycoprotein of transmitted variants were typically more compact than those of chronically infected donors, with shorter V1/V2 regions and fewer potential N-linked glycosylation sites (15). Similar genetic and/or serological selections have been identified in several additional, although not all, cohorts (8, 31, 33). One biological feature associated with the transmitted variants is greater sensitivity to neutralization by the infecting partner''s antibody (15). However, it is unclear what selective advantage this property would provide in an immune naïve recipient, compared with other variants present in donors, raising the possibility that these gp120 features may confer other biological characteristics favoring transmission and/or establishment of infection.In this study, we compared the tropism and coreceptor utilization characteristics of donor and recipient Env glycoproteins derived from subtype C heterosexual transmission pairs obtained near the time of acute infection that have previously been linked to this genetic selection pattern (15). Because of the potential role for macrophages in transmission and uncertainty over the importance of macrophage tropism per se in the bottleneck, we assessed these variants’ ability to mediate entry into primary human macrophages, as well as primary CD4⁺ T cells. In addition to CCR5 and CXCR4, a number of other G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) can support HIV-1 entry and infection in in vitro systems, although a role for these alternative coreceptors in vivo has yet to be identified. Therefore, to address the possibility that one of these pathways might be involved in sexual transmission and contribute to the molecular bottleneck, we asked if donor and recipient Envs differed in their abilities to use alternative coreceptors for entry. Finally, since HIV-1 gp120 molecules vary in the molecular details of how they interact with CCR5, and since CCR5 may be expressed differently in the context of different target cells (29), we determined whether molecular anatomy of CCR5 use was different between donor and recipient Envs. Finally, in addition to enabling comparison of donors and recipients within transmission pairs, the panel of Envs also enabled us to address the tropism and coreceptor characteristics of “chronic” versus “acute” subtype C Envs.     

Determinants Flanking the CD4 Binding Loop Modulate Macrophage Tropism of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 R5 Envelopes

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 R5 viruses vary extensively in phenotype. Thus, R5 envelopes (env) in the brain tissue of individuals with neurological complications are frequently highly macrophage-tropic. Macrophage tropism correlates with the capacity of the envelope to exploit low CD4 levels for infection. In addition, the presence of an asparagine at residue 283 within the CD4 binding site has been associated with brain-derived envelopes, increased env-CD4 affinity, and enhanced macrophage tropism. Here, we identify additional envelope determinants of R5 macrophage tropism. We compared highly macrophage-tropic (B33) and non-macrophage-tropic (LN40) envelopes from brain and lymph node specimens of one individual. We first examined the role of residue 283 in macrophage tropism. Introduction of N283 into LN40 (T283N) conferred efficient macrophage infectivity. In contrast, substitution of N283 for the more conserved threonine in B33 had little effect on macrophage infection. Thus, B33 carried determinants for macrophage tropism that were independent of N283. We prepared chimeric B33/LN40 envelopes and used site-directed mutagenesis to identify additional determinants. The determinants of macrophage tropism that were identified included residues on the CD4 binding loop flanks that were proximal to CD4 contact residues and residues in the V3 loop. The same residues affected sensitivity to CD4-immunoglobulin G inhibition, consistent with an altered env-CD4 affinity. We predict that these determinants alter exposure of CD4 contact residues. Moreover, the CD4 binding loop flanks are variable and may contribute to a general mechanism for protecting proximal CD4 contact residues from neutralizing antibodies. Our results have relevance for env-based vaccines that will need to expose critical CD4 contact residues to the immune system.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) requires interactions between viral envelope glycoproteins and cell surface CD4 and coreceptors to trigger fusion and entry into cells. HIV-1 R5 viruses that specifically use CCR5 as a coreceptor are those predominantly transmitted (3). Yet, our knowledge of R5 virus variation in different biological properties is still limited. In vivo, HIV-1 infection is limited mostly to cells that express CD4 and appropriate coreceptors. Thus, HIV-1 infects CD4⁺ T cells, monocyte/macrophage lineage cells, and dendritic cells. CCR5 is expressed on each of these cell lineages, although on T cells, CCR5 is restricted mainly to RO45⁺ memory cells (1, 16). Early in infection, R5 viruses target and decimate mucosal CD4⁺ memory T cells (2, 18, 26). R5 viruses are also predominant in tissues in which monocyte/macrophage lineage cells are prevalent, and several reports have described the presence of highly macrophage-tropic R5 viruses in brain tissue (11, 12, 20, 22). Previously, we used PCR to amplify HIV-1 envelope genes directly from patient tissues. We found that R5 virus envelopes amplified from brain tissue frequently conferred highly efficient infection of macrophages, while the majority of those from lymph nodes, blood, and semen infected macrophages inefficiently (20, 22). Although those studies examined relatively few infected individuals, they demonstrated over 1,000-fold variation in macrophage-tropic HIV-1 R5 viruses. Such variation is likely to have a significant impact on transmission and pathogenesis.The envelope (env) determinants of R5 macrophage-tropic strains are poorly understood. Several studies have shown that highly macrophage-tropic brain envelopes are able to exploit low levels of CD4 on macrophages for infection, consistent with an enhanced interaction between gp120 and CD4. Dunfee et al. reported that an asparagine residue at position 283 in the C2 part of the CD4 binding site was present in 41% of envelope sequences from brain tissue specimens of patients with HIV-associated dementia and in only 8% of envelopes from non-HIV-associated dementia brain tissue (8). The same study showed that the presence of N283 (rather than the more conserved T283) led to an increased affinity of gp120 for CD4, probably because the side chain of asparagine could more readily form a hydrogen bond with Q40 on CD4. However, our previous data showed that N283 is not the only determinant of macrophage infectivity, since several macrophage-tropic R5 envelopes from brain and semen specimens lacked N283, while non-macrophage-tropic envelopes from lymph node specimens carrying N283 were identified (22). Dunfee et al. also reported that a glycosylation site at residue 386, close to the CD4 binding loop, influenced exposure of the CD4 binding site and had an impact on macrophage tropism and sensitivity to the CD4 binding site antibody b12 (9). We have recently confirmed a role for N386 in resistance to the CD4 binding site monoclonal antibody (MAb) b12. However, resistance was dependent on the presence of a proximal residue, R373, which acted together with N386 to block b12 (7).Here, we have further investigated envelope determinants of macrophage tropism by preparing chimeric envelopes from highly macrophage-tropic and non-macrophage-tropic R5 envelopes from brain and lymph node specimens from the same subject. We show that R5 macrophage tropism is controlled by several determinants in gp120 that are focused on amino acids flanking the CD4 binding loop, with a contribution from residues in the V3 loop.     

Hybrid Approach for Predicting Coreceptor Used by HIV-1 from Its V3 Loop Amino Acid Sequence

Background

HIV-1 infects the host cell by interacting with the primary receptor CD4 and a coreceptor CCR5 or CXCR4. Maraviroc, a CCR5 antagonist binds to CCR5 receptor. Thus, it is important to identify the coreceptor used by the HIV strains dominating in the patient. In past, a number of experimental assays and in-silico techniques have been developed for predicting the coreceptor tropism. The prediction accuracy of these methods is excellent when predicting CCR5(R5) tropic sequences but is relatively poor for CXCR4(X4) tropic sequences. Therefore, any new method for accurate determination of coreceptor usage would be of paramount importance to the successful management of HIV-infected individuals.

Results

The dataset used in this study comprised 1799 R5-tropic and 598 X4-tropic third variable (V3) sequences of HIV-1. We compared the amino acid composition of both types of V3 sequences and observed that certain types of residues, e.g., Asparagine and Isoleucine, were preferred in R5-tropic sequences whereas residues like Lysine, Arginine, and Tryptophan were preferred in X4-tropic sequences. Initially, Support Vector Machine-based models were developed using amino acid composition, dipeptide composition, and split amino acid composition, which achieved accuracy up to 90%. We used BLAST to discriminate R5- and X4-tropic sequences and correctly predicted 93.16% of R5- and 75.75% of X4-tropic sequences. In order to improve the prediction accuracy, a Hybrid model was developed that achieved 91.66% sensitivity, 81.77% specificity, 89.19% accuracy and 0.72 Matthews Correlation Coefficient. The performance of our models was also evaluated on an independent dataset (256 R5- and 81 X4-tropic sequences) and achieved maximum accuracy of 84.87% with Matthews Correlation Coefficient 0.63.

Conclusion

This study describes a highly efficient method for predicting HIV-1 coreceptor usage from V3 sequences. In order to provide a service to the scientific community, a webserver HIVcoPred was developed (http://www.imtech.res.in/raghava/hivcopred/) for predicting the coreceptor usage.     

Comparative Immunogenicity of Subtype A Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Envelope Exhibiting Differential Exposure of Conserved Neutralization Epitopes

Development of broadly cross-reactive neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) remains a major goal of HIV-1 vaccine development, but most candidate envelope immunogens have had limited ability to cross-neutralize heterologous strains. To evaluate the immunogenicity of subtype A variants of HIV-1, rabbits were immunized with pairs of closely related subtype A envelopes from the same individual. In each immunogen pair, one variant was readily neutralized by a variety of monoclonal antibodies and plasma antibodies, while the other was neutralization resistant, suggesting differences in the exposures of key epitopes. The breadth of the antibody response was evaluated against subtype A, B, C, and D variants of HIV-1. The specificity of the immunogen-derived neutralizing antibody response was also compared to that of the infected individuals from whom these variants were cloned. None of the immunogens produced broad neutralizing antibodies in immunized animals, and most of the neutralizing antibodies were directed to the variable loops, particularly the V3 loop. No detectable antibodies to either of the potentially exposed conserved epitopes, the membrane proximal external region, or the CD4 binding site were found with immunized rabbits. In contrast, relatively little of the neutralizing activity within the plasma samples of the infected individuals was directed to linear epitopes within the variable loops. These data indicate that immunogens designed to expose conserved regions did not enhance generation of broadly neutralizing antibodies in comparison with the immunogens that failed to expose those regions using this immunization approach.The ability to elicit broadly cross-reactive neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) is likely to be an important component of an effective vaccine to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). Unfortunately, the HIV-1 envelope (Env)-based vaccines developed to date do not elicit such antibodies. Initial vaccines based on soluble, monomeric gp120 generated antibodies capable of only weakly neutralizing the homologous virus, with a very narrow breadth of cross-reactivity (13, 30, 53). Subsequent modifications to the Env immunogens, including variable loop deletions (15, 20, 31, 34, 35, 61, 64-66), alterations in the glycosylation pattern (4, 10, 11, 14, 30, 43, 55, 56), epitope repositioning (39, 46), the use of consensus Envs (22, 36, 37, 47), and the use of soluble trimeric gp140 molecules as immunogens (1-3, 5, 14, 16, 20, 21, 24, 25) have led to only modest enhancements in NAb breadth or potency. These modified Env immunogens have failed to redirect NAbs from the variable loops to more conserved regions of Env (reviewed in reference 33).Differences in Env structure between HIV-1 subtypes may further hinder efforts to elicit broadly cross-reactive antibodies capable of protecting against transmitted strains worldwide. Most immunogens tested to date have been derived from subtype B Envs. However, there are clear antigenic differences between subtype B strains and the subtype A and C strains that account for most infections worldwide (6, 8, 27, 28, 40, 42). For instance, most transmitted subtype A Envs are resistant to the monoclonal antibodies 2G12, b12, 2F5, and 4E10, either because of alterations in the epitopes for these monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) or because the epitopes are shielded in these Envs (6, 8). It is therefore possible that even NAbs specific for a conserved region of subtype B Envs, such as the CD4 binding site, would not be able to access and neutralize a similar epitope on a subtype A Env.In order to evaluate the immunogenicity of subtype A Envs, which account for ∼25% of global HIV-1 infections (12), we previously investigated the types of antibody responses elicited following gp160 priming and gp140 boosting with immunogens derived from four subtype A Envs in comparison to the subtype B Env SF162 (38). These experiments were also designed to explore whether deriving immunogens from HIV-1 Envs isolated from early in infection would better target NAbs to transmitted strains. Although all of the subtype A-based immunogens and the SF162 immunogen elicited anti-V3 NAbs capable of neutralizing the easy-to-neutralize SF162 pseudovirus, only one of the four immunogens generated homologous NAbs (38). Even immunogens with shorter variable loops or fewer potential N-linked glycosylation sites (PNGS) did not lead to enhanced breadth of neutralization against heterologous subtype A or B Envs (38). However, the four subtype A Envs used in these immunizations were generally neutralization resistant to both plasma samples from HIV-1-infected individuals and to monoclonal antibodies (6), raising the possibility that the poor breadth observed could be related to the shielding of conserved epitopes within these Envs.In order to determine whether using subtype A Env immunogens that do not shield conserved epitopes could improve neutralization breadth, here we performed immunizations with pairs of Env immunogens derived from two individuals acutely infected with subtype A HIV-1. The Envs in each pair were very similar in their amino acid sequences yet differed dramatically in their neutralization phenotype (6, 9) (Fig. ​(Fig.1A).1A). The pair from subject Q461 had a neutralization-resistant Env, {type:entrez-protein,attrs:{text:Q461e2,term_id:123931369,term_text:Q461E2}}Q461e2 (termed {type:entrez-protein,attrs:{text:Q461e2,term_id:123931369,term_text:Q461E2}}Q461e2^R to indicate neutralization resistance), and a neutralization-sensitive Env, {type:entrez-protein,attrs:{text:Q461d1,term_id:123852094,term_text:Q461D1}}Q461d1 (termed {type:entrez-protein,attrs:{text:Q461d1,term_id:123852094,term_text:Q461D1}}Q461d1^S to indicate neutralization sensitivity), which was sensitive to neutralization by plasma, 2F5, 4E10, b12, and soluble CD4 (sCD4). We previously demonstrated that the neutralization sensitivity of the {type:entrez-protein,attrs:{text:Q461d1,term_id:123852094,term_text:Q461D1}}Q461d1^S Env is mediated entirely by two amino acid substitutions in gp41, one in the first heptad repeat and one in the membrane proximal external region (MPER) (9). These mutations led to enhanced exposure of both the CD4 binding site and the MPER (9). From subject Q168, the Env Q168b23^S was sensitive to autologous and heterologous plasma and to the MPER antibodies 2F5 and 4E10 but resistant to b12 and sCD4, while {type:entrez-protein,attrs:{text:Q168a2,term_id:123361966,term_text:Q168A2}}Q168a2^R was weakly neutralized by the MPER antibodies, less sensitive to neutralization by autologous plasma, and resistant to heterologous plasma (6). The {type:entrez-protein,attrs:{text:Q168a2,term_id:123361966,term_text:Q168A2}}Q168a2^R and Q168b23^S Envs contain identical sequences in the MPER region yet have >500-fold differences in neutralization sensitivity to 2F5 and 4E10, indicating that the exposure of the MPER region, rather than the sequence, likely accounts for the enhanced neutralization of the Q168b23^S Env.Open in a separate windowFIG. 1.Analysis of {type:entrez-protein,attrs:{text:Q461d1,term_id:123852094,term_text:Q461D1}}Q461d1^S gp140 used for immunizations. (A) SDS-PAGE analysis of final preparation of {type:entrez-protein,attrs:{text:Q461d1,term_id:123852094,term_text:Q461D1}}Q461d1^S gp140 from the GNA capture and DEAE and CHAP columns. Lane 1 contains molecular weight standards, lane 2 the concentrated DEAE flowthrough, and lane 3 the final concentrated protein. The purified {type:entrez-protein,attrs:{text:Q461d1,term_id:123852094,term_text:Q461D1}}Q461d1^S gp140 protein is indicated by an arrow. The sizes of the molecular weight markers (in thousands) are indicated on the left. (B) Binding of purified gp140 subtype A to CD4 as determined by a high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC)-based assay. The bottom line represents the protein obtained after the GNA column, and the top line represents purified protein after all three steps. The trimer and monomer peaks are marked. (C) Summary of neutralization characteristics of all four HIV-1 subtype A Env variants used in the immunizations, adapted from reference 6. The pseudovirus is shown in the far left column. IC₅₀ values for plasma sample (left) and monoclonal antibodies (right) are displayed. The autologous plasma samples were taken 3.7 ypi for subject Q461 and 2.6 ypi for subject Q168. The Kenya pool was derived by pooling plasma from 30 HIV-1-infected individuals in Kenya and has been described previously (6).Thus, to directly test whether using Env immunogens that expose conserved epitopes could enhance neutralization breadth immunization, here we immunized with these pairs of related Envs, in which one variant exposes conserved regions, while the other does not. We also compared the specificity of the NAb responses following immunization with these Envs with the specificities of the NAbs that developed during natural infection in the individuals from whom these variants were cloned.     

Distinct Molecular Pathways to X4 Tropism for a V3-Truncated Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Lead to Differential Coreceptor Interactions and Sensitivity to a CXCR4 Antagonist

During the course of infection, transmitted HIV-1 isolates that initially use CCR5 can acquire the ability to use CXCR4, which is associated with an accelerated progression to AIDS. Although this coreceptor switch is often associated with mutations in the stem of the viral envelope (Env) V3 loop, domains outside V3 can also play a role, and the underlying mechanisms and structural basis for how X4 tropism is acquired remain unknown. In this study we used a V3 truncated R5-tropic Env as a starting point to derive two X4-tropic Envs, termed ΔV3-X4A.c5 and ΔV3-X4B.c7, which took distinct molecular pathways for this change. The ΔV3-X4A.c5 Env clone acquired a 7-amino-acid insertion in V3 that included three positively charged residues, reestablishing an interaction with the CXCR4 extracellular loops (ECLs) and rendering it highly susceptible to the CXCR4 antagonist AMD3100. In contrast, the ΔV3-X4B.c7 Env maintained the V3 truncation but acquired mutations outside V3 that were critical for X4 tropism. In contrast to ΔV3-X4A.c5, ΔV3-X4B.c7 showed increased dependence on the CXCR4 N terminus (NT) and was completely resistant to AMD3100. These results indicate that HIV-1 X4 coreceptor switching can involve (i) V3 loop mutations that establish interactions with the CXCR4 ECLs, and/or (ii) mutations outside V3 that enhance interactions with the CXCR4 NT. The cooperative contributions of CXCR4 NT and ECL interactions with gp120 in acquiring X4 tropism likely impart flexibility on pathways for viral evolution and suggest novel approaches to isolate these interactions for drug discovery.For human immunodeficiency virus type I (HIV-1) to enter a target cell, the gp120 subunit of the viral envelope glycoprotein (Env) must engage CD4 and a coreceptor on the cell surface. Although numerous coreceptors have been identified in vitro, the two most important coreceptors in vivo are the CCR5 (3, 11, 19, 22, 24) and CXCR4 (27) chemokine receptors. HIV-1 variants that can use only CCR5 (R5 viruses) are critical for HIV-1 transmission and predominate during the early stages of infection (86, 90). The importance of CCR5 for HIV-1 transmission is underscored by the fact that individuals bearing a homozygous 32-bp deletion in the CCR5 gene (ccr5-Δ32) are largely resistant to HIV-1 infection (15, 49, 84). Although R5 viruses typically persist into late disease stages, viruses that can use CXCR4, either alone (X4 viruses) or in addition to CCR5 (R5X4 viruses), emerge in approximately 50% of individuals infected with subtype B or D viruses (12, 39, 44). Although not required for disease progression, the appearance of X4 and/or R5X4 viruses is associated with a more rapid depletion of CD4⁺ cells in peripheral blood and faster progression to AIDS (12, 44, 77, 86). However, it remains unclear whether these viruses are a cause or a consequence of accelerated CD4⁺ T cell decline (57). The emergence of CXCR4-using viruses has also complicated the use of small-molecule CCR5 antagonists as anti-HIV-therapeutics as these compounds can select for the outgrowth of X4 or R5X4 escape variants (93).Following triggering by CD4, gp120 binds to a coreceptor via two principal interactions: (i) the bridging sheet, a four-stranded antiparallel beta sheet that connects the inner and outer domains of gp120, together with the base of the V3 loop, engages the coreceptor N terminus (NT); and (ii) more distal regions of V3 interact with the coreceptor extracellular loops (ECLs) (13, 14, 36-38, 43, 59, 60, 78, 79, 88). Although both the NT and ECL interactions are important for coreceptor binding and entry, their relative contributions vary among different HIV-1 strains (23). For example, V3 interactions with the ECLs, particularly ECL2, serve a dominant role in CXCR4 utilization (7, 21, 50, 63, 72), while R5 viruses exhibit a more variable use of CCR5 domains, with the NT interaction being particularly important (4, 6, 20, 67, 83). Although V3 is the primary determinant of coreceptor preference (34), it is unclear how specificity for CCR5 and/or CXCR4 is determined, and, in particular, it is unknown how X4 tropism is acquired. Several reports have shown that the emergence of X4 tropism correlates with the acquisition of positively charged residues in the V3 stem (17, 29, 87), particularly at positions 11, 24, and 25 (8, 17, 28, 29, 42, 75), raising the possibility that these mutations directly or indirectly mediate interactions with negatively charged residues in the CXCR4 ECLs. However, Env domains outside V3, including V1/V2 (9, 32, 45, 46, 61, 64, 65, 80, 95) and even gp41 (40), can also contribute to coreceptor switching, and it is unclear mechanistically or structurally how X4 tropism is determined.We previously derived a replication-competent variant of the R5X4 HIV-1 clone R3A that contained a markedly truncated V3 loop (47). This Env was generated by introducing a mutation termed ΔV3(9,9), which deleted the distal 15 amino acids of V3. The ΔV3(9,9) mutation selectively ablated X4 tropism but left R5 tropism intact, consistent with the view that an interaction between the distal half of V3 and the ECLs is critical for CXCR4 usage (7, 21, 43, 50, 59, 60, 63, 72). This V3-truncated virus provided a unique opportunity to address whether CXCR4 utilization could be regained on a background in which this critical V3-ECL interaction had been ablated and, if so, by what mechanism. Here, we characterize two novel X4 variants of R3A ΔV3(9,9) derived by adapting this virus to replicate in CXCR4⁺ CCR5⁻ SupT1 cells. We show that R3A ΔV3(9,9) could indeed reacquire X4 tropism but through two markedly different mechanisms. One X4 variant, designated ΔV3-X4A, acquired changes in the V3 remnant that reestablished an interaction with the CXCR4 ECLs; the other, ΔV3-X4B, acquired changes outside V3 that engendered interactions with the CXCR4 NT. These divergent evolutionary pathways led to profound differences in sensitivity to the CXCR4 antagonist AMD3100, with ΔV3-X4A showing increased sensitivity relative to R3A and with ΔV3-X4B becoming completely resistant. These findings demonstrate the contributions that interactions with distinct coreceptor regions have in mediating tropism and drug sensitivity and illustrate how HIV''s remarkable evolutionary plasticity in adapting to selection pressures can be exploited to better understand its biological potential.     

Virus Entry via the Alternative Coreceptors CCR3 and FPRL1 Differs by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Subtype

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infects target cells by binding to CD4 and a chemokine receptor, most commonly CCR5. CXCR4 is a frequent alternative coreceptor (CoR) in subtype B and D HIV-1 infection, but the importance of many other alternative CoRs remains elusive. We have analyzed HIV-1 envelope (Env) proteins from 66 individuals infected with the major subtypes of HIV-1 to determine if virus entry into highly permissive NP-2 cell lines expressing most known alternative CoRs differed by HIV-1 subtype. We also performed linear regression analysis to determine if virus entry via the major CoR CCR5 correlated with use of any alternative CoR and if this correlation differed by subtype. Virus pseudotyped with subtype B Env showed robust entry via CCR3 that was highly correlated with CCR5 entry efficiency. By contrast, viruses pseudotyped with subtype A and C Env proteins were able to use the recently described alternative CoR FPRL1 more efficiently than CCR3, and use of FPRL1 was correlated with CCR5 entry. Subtype D Env was unable to use either CCR3 or FPRL1 efficiently, a unique pattern of alternative CoR use. These results suggest that each subtype of circulating HIV-1 may be subject to somewhat different selective pressures for Env-mediated entry into target cells and suggest that CCR3 may be used as a surrogate CoR by subtype B while FPRL1 may be used as a surrogate CoR by subtypes A and C. These data may provide insight into development of resistance to CCR5-targeted entry inhibitors and alternative entry pathways for each HIV-1 subtype.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infects target cells by binding first to CD4 and then to a coreceptor (CoR), of which C-C chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) is the most common (6, 53). CXCR4 is an additional CoR for up to 50% of subtype B and D HIV-1 isolates at very late stages of disease (4, 7, 28, 35). Many other seven-membrane-spanning G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been identified as alternative CoRs when expressed on various target cell lines in vitro, including CCR1 (76, 79), CCR2b (24), CCR3 (3, 5, 17, 32, 60), CCR8 (18, 34, 38), GPR1 (27, 65), GPR15/BOB (22), CXCR5 (39), CXCR6/Bonzo/STRL33/TYMSTR (9, 22, 25, 45, 46), APJ (26), CMKLR1/ChemR23 (49, 62), FPLR1 (67, 68), RDC1 (66), and D6 (55). HIV-2 and simian immunodeficiency virus SIVmac isolates more frequently show expanded use of these alternative CoRs than HIV-1 isolates (12, 30, 51, 74), and evidence that alternative CoRs other than CXCR4 mediate infection of primary target cells by HIV-1 isolates is sparse (18, 30, 53, 81). Genetic deficiency in CCR5 expression is highly protective against HIV-1 transmission (21, 36), establishing CCR5 as the primary CoR. The importance of alternative CoRs other than CXCR4 has remained elusive despite many studies (1, 30, 70, 81). Expansion of CoR use from CCR5 to include CXCR4 is frequently associated with the ability to use additional alternative CoRs for viral entry (8, 16, 20, 63, 79) in most but not all studies (29, 33, 40, 77, 78). This finding suggests that the sequence changes in HIV-1 env required for use of CXCR4 as an additional or alternative CoR (14, 15, 31, 37, 41, 57) are likely to increase the potential to use other alternative CoRs.We have used the highly permissive NP-2/CD4 human glioma cell line developed by Soda et al. (69) to classify virus entry via the alternative CoRs CCR1, CCR3, CCR8, GPR1, CXCR6, APJ, CMKLR1/ChemR23, FPRL1, and CXCR4. Full-length molecular clones of 66 env genes from most prevalent HIV-1 subtypes were used to generate infectious virus pseudotypes expressing a luciferase reporter construct (19, 57). Two types of analysis were performed: the level of virus entry mediated by each alternative CoR and linear regression of entry mediated by CCR5 versus all other alternative CoRs. We thus were able to identify patterns of alternative CoR use that were subtype specific and to determine if use of any alternative CoR was correlated or independent of CCR5-mediated entry. The results obtained have implications for the evolution of env function, and the analyses revealed important differences between subtype B Env function and all other HIV-1 subtypes.     

Evidence that Antibody-Mediated Neutralization of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 by Sera from Infected Individuals Is Independent of Coreceptor Usage

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) uses a variety of chemokine receptors as coreceptors for virus entry, and the ability of the virus to be neutralized by antibody may depend on which coreceptors are used. In particular, laboratory-adapted variants of the virus that use CXCR4 as a coreceptor are highly sensitive to neutralization by sera from HIV-1-infected individuals, whereas primary isolates that use CCR5 instead of, or in addition to, CXCR4 are neutralized poorly. To determine whether this dichotomy in neutralization sensitivity could be explained by differential coreceptor usage, virus neutralization by serum samples from HIV-1-infected individuals was assessed in MT-2 cells, which express CXCR4 but not CCR5, and in mitogen-stimulated human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), where multiple coreceptors including CXCR4 and CCR5 are available for use. Our results showed that three of four primary isolates with a syncytium-inducing (SI) phenotype and that use CXCR4 and CCR5 were neutralized poorly in both MT-2 cells and PBMC. The fourth isolate, designated 89.6, was more sensitive to neutralization in MT-2 cells than in PBMC. We showed that the neutralization of 89.6 in PBMC was not improved when CCR5 was blocked by having RANTES, MIP-1α, and MIP-1β in the culture medium, indicating that CCR5 usage was not responsible for the decreased sensitivity to neutralization in PBMC. Consistent with this finding, a laboratory-adapted strain of virus (IIIB) was significantly more sensitive to neutralization in CCR5-deficient PBMC (homozygous Δ32-CCR5 allele) than were two of two SI primary isolates tested. The results indicate that the ability of HIV-1 to be neutralized by sera from infected individuals depends on factors other than coreceptor usage.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), the etiologic agent of AIDS, utilizes the HLA class II receptor, CD4, as its primary receptor to gain entry into cells (17, 30). Entry is initiated by a high-affinity interaction between CD4 and the surface gp120 of the virus (32). Subsequent to this interaction, conformational changes that permit fusion of the viral membrane with cellular membranes occur within the viral transmembrane gp41 (9, 58, 59). In addition to CD4, one or more recently described viral coreceptors are needed for fusion to take place. These coreceptors belong to a family of seven-transmembrane G-protein-coupled proteins and include the CXC chemokine receptor CXCR4 (3, 4, 24, 44), the CC chemokine receptors CCR5 (1, 12, 13, 18, 21, 23, 45) and, less commonly, CCR3 and CCR2b (12, 21), and two related orphan receptors termed BONZO/STRL33 and BOB (19, 34). Coreceptor usage by HIV-1 can be blocked by naturally occurring ligands, including SDF-1 for CXCR4 (4, 44), RANTES, MIP-1α, and MIP-1β in the case of CCR5 (13, 45), and eotaxin for CCR3 (12).The selective cellular tropisms of different strains of HIV-1 may be determined in part by coreceptor usage. For example, all culturable HIV-1 variants replicate initially in mitogen-stimulated human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), but only a minor fraction are able to infect established CD4⁺ T-cell lines (43). This differential tropism is explained by the expression of CXCR4 together with CCR5 and other CC chemokine coreceptors on PBMC and the lack of expression of CCR5 on most T-cell lines (5, 10, 19, 35, 39, 50, 53). Indeed, low-passage field strains (i.e., primary isolates) of HIV-1 that fail to replicate in T-cell lines use CCR5 as their major coreceptor and are unable to use CXCR4 (1, 12, 18, 21, 23, 28). Because these isolates rarely produce syncytia in PBMC and fail to infect MT-2 cells, they are often classified as having a non-syncytium-inducing (NSI) phenotype. Primary isolates with a syncytium-inducing (SI) phenotype are able to use CXCR4 alone or, more usually, in addition to CCR5 (16, 20, 51). HIV-1 variants that have been passaged multiple times in CD4⁺ T-cell lines, and therefore considered to be laboratory adapted, exhibit a pattern of coreceptor usage that resembles that of SI primary isolates. Most studies have shown that the laboratory-adapted strain IIIB uses CXCR4 alone (3, 13, 20, 24, 51) and that MN and SF-2 use CXCR4 primarily and CCR5 to a lesser degree (11, 13). Sequences within the V3 loop of gp120 have been shown to be important, either directly or indirectly, for the interaction of HIV-1 with both CXCR4 (52) and CCR5 (12, 14, 54, 60). This region of gp120 contains multiple determinants of cellular tropism (43) and is a major target for neutralizing antibodies to laboratory-adapted HIV-1 but not to primary isolates (29, 46, 57).It has been known for some time that the ability of sera from HIV-1-infected individuals to neutralize laboratory-adapted strains of HIV-1 does not predict their ability to neutralize primary isolates in vitro (7). In general, the former viruses are highly sensitive to neutralization whereas the latter viruses are neutralized poorly by antibodies induced in response to HIV-1 infection (7, 43). Importantly, neutralizing antibodies generated by candidate HIV-1 subunit vaccines have been highly specific for laboratory-adapted viruses (26, 37, 38). In principle, the dichotomy in neutralization sensitivity between these two categories of virus could be related to coreceptor usage. To test this, we investigated whether the use of CXCR4 in the absence of CCR5 would render SI primary isolates highly sensitive to neutralization in vitro by sera from HIV-1-infected individuals. Two similar studies using human monoclonal antibodies and soluble CD4 have been reported (31a, 55).     

Potential Contributions of Viral Envelope and Host Genetic Factors in a Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1-Infected Long-Term Survivor

The lack of clinical progression in some individuals despite prolonged human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection may result from infection with less-pathogenic viral strains. To address this question, we examined the HIV-1 envelope protein from a donor with a low viral burden, stable CD4⁺ T-lymphocyte counts, and little evidence of CD8⁺ T-cell expansion, activation, or immune activity. To avoid potential changes in envelope function resulting from selection in vitro, envelope clones were constructed by using viral RNA isolated from uncultured peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). The data showed that recombinant viruses containing envelope sequences derived from RNA isolated from patient PBMC replicated poorly in primary CD4⁺ T cells but demonstrated efficient growth in macrophages. The unusual phenotype of these viruses could not be explained solely by differential utilization of coreceptors since the chimeric viruses, as well as an uncloned isolate obtained from the same visit date, can utilize CCR5. In addition, the donor’s own cells appeared resistant to infection with chimeric viruses containing autologous envelope sequences. Genotype analysis revealed that the donor was heterozygous for the previously described 32-bp deletion in CCR5 which may be linked with prolonged survival in HIV-1-infected individuals. These data suggest that the changes in envelope sequences confer properties of viral attenuation, which together with the CCR5 +/Δ32 genotype could account for the long-term survival of this patient.