Analysis of the Viral Elements Required in the Nuclear Import of HIV-1 DNA

HIV-1 possesses an exquisite ability to infect cells independently from their cycling status by undergoing an active phase of nuclear import through the nuclear pore. This property has been ascribed to the presence of karyophilic elements present in viral nucleoprotein complexes, such as the matrix protein (MA); Vpr; the integrase (IN); and a cis-acting structure present in the newly synthesized DNA, the DNA flap. However, their role in nuclear import remains controversial at best. In the present study, we carried out a comprehensive analysis of the role of these elements in nuclear import in a comparison between several primary cell types, including stimulated lymphocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells. We show that despite the fact that none of these elements is absolutely required for nuclear import, disruption of the central polypurine tract-central termination sequence (cPPT-CTS) clearly affects the kinetics of viral DNA entry into the nucleus. This effect is independent of the cell cycle status of the target cells and is observed in cycling as well as in nondividing primary cells, suggesting that nuclear import of viral DNA may occur similarly under both conditions. Nonetheless, this study indicates that other components are utilized along with the cPPT-CTS for an efficient entry of viral DNA into the nucleus.Lentiviruses display an exquisite ability to infect dividing and nondividing cells alike that is unequalled among Retroviridae. This property is thought to be due to the particular behavior or composition of the viral nucleoprotein complexes (NPCs) that are liberated into the cytoplasm of target cells upon virus-to-cell membrane fusion and that allow lentiviruses to traverse an intact nuclear membrane (17, 28, 29, 39, 52, 55, 67, 79). In the case of the human immunodeficiency type I virus (HIV-1), several studies over the years identified viral components of such structures with intrinsic karyophilic properties and thus perfect candidates for mediation of the passage of viral DNA (vDNA) through the nuclear pore: the matrix protein (MA); Vpr; the integrase (IN); and a three-stranded DNA flap, a structure present in neo-synthesized viral DNA, specified by the central polypurine tract-central termination sequence (cPPT-CTS). It is clear that these elements may mediate nuclear import directly or via the recruitment of the host''s proteins, and indeed, several cellular proteins have been found to influence HIV-1 infection during nuclear import, like the karyopherin α2 Rch1 (38); importin 7 (3, 30, 93); the transportin SR-2 (13, 20); or the nucleoporins Nup98 (27), Nup358/RANBP2, and Nup153 (13, 56).More recently, the capsid protein (CA), the main structural component of viral nucleoprotein complexes at least upon their cytoplasmic entry, has also been suggested to be involved in nuclear import or in postnuclear entry steps (14, 25, 74, 90, 92). Whether this is due to a role for CA in the shaping of viral nucleoprotein complexes or to a direct interaction between CA and proteins involved in nuclear import remains at present unknown.Despite a large number of reports, no single viral or cellular element has been described as absolutely necessary or sufficient to mediate lentiviral nuclear import, and important controversies as to the experimental evidences linking these elements to this step exist. For example, MA was among the first viral protein of HIV-1 described to be involved in nuclear import, and 2 transferable nuclear localization signals (NLSs) have been described to occur at its N and C termini (40). However, despite the fact that early studies indicated that the mutation of these NLSs perturbed HIV-1 nuclear import and infection specifically in nondividing cells, such as macrophages (86), these findings failed to be confirmed in more-recent studies (23, 33, 34, 57, 65, 75).Similarly, Vpr has been implicated by several studies of the nuclear import of HIV-1 DNA (1, 10, 21, 43, 45, 47, 64, 69, 72, 73, 85). Vpr does not possess classical NLSs, yet it displays a transferable nucleophilic activity when fused to heterologous proteins (49-51, 53, 77, 81) and has been shown to line onto the nuclear envelope (32, 36, 47, 51, 58), where it can truly facilitate the passage of the viral genome into the nucleus. However, the role of Vpr in this step remains controversial, as in some instances Vpr is not even required for viral replication in nondividing cells (1, 59).Conflicting results concerning the role of IN during HIV-1 nuclear import also exist. Indeed, several transferable NLSs have been described to occur in the catalytic core and the C-terminal DNA binding domains of IN, but for some of these, initial reports of nuclear entry defects (2, 9, 22, 46, 71) were later shown to result from defects at steps other than nuclear import (60, 62, 70, 83). These reports do not exclude a role for the remaining NLSs in IN during nuclear import, and they do not exclude the possibility that IN may mediate this step by associating with components of the cellular nuclear import machinery, such as importin alpha and beta (41), importin 7 (3, 30, 93, 98), and, more recently, transportin-SR2 (20).The central DNA flap, a structure present in lentiviruses and in at least 1 yeast retroelement (44), but not in other orthoretroviruses, has also been involved in the nuclear import of viral DNA (4, 6, 7, 31, 78, 84, 95, 96), and more recently, it has been proposed to provide a signal for viral nucleoprotein complexes uncoating in the proximity of the nuclear pore, with the consequence of providing a signal for import (8). However, various studies showed an absence or weakness of nuclear entry defects in viruses devoid of the DNA flap (24, 26, 44, 61).Overall, the importance of viral factors in HIV-1 nuclear import is still unclear. The discrepancies concerning the role of MA, IN, Vpr, and cPPT-CTS in HIV-1 nuclear import could in part be explained by their possible redundancy. To date, only one comprehensive study analyzed the role of these four viral potentially karyophilic elements together (91). This study showed that an HIV-1 chimera where these elements were either deleted or replaced by their murine leukemia virus (MLV) counterparts was, in spite of an important infectivity defect, still able to infect cycling and cell cycle-arrested cell lines to similar efficiencies. If this result indicated that the examined viral elements of HIV-1 were dispensable for the cell cycle independence of HIV, as infections proceeded equally in cycling and arrested cells, they did not prove that they were not required in nuclear import, because chimeras displayed a severe infectivity defect that precluded their comparison with the wild type (WT).Nuclear import and cell cycle independence may not be as simply linked as previously thought. On the one hand, there has been no formal demonstration that the passage through the nuclear pore, and thus nuclear import, is restricted to nondividing cells, and for what we know, this passage may be an obligatory step in HIV infection in all cells, irrespective of their cycling status. In support of this possibility, certain mutations in viral elements of HIV affect nuclear import in dividing as well as in nondividing cells (4, 6, 7, 31, 84, 95). On the other hand, cell cycle-independent infection may be a complex phenomenon that is made possible not only by the ability of viral DNA to traverse the nuclear membrane but also by its ability to cope with pre- and postnuclear entry events, as suggested by the phenotypes of certain CA mutants (74, 92).Given that the cellular environment plays an important role during the early steps of viral infection, we chose to analyze the role of the four karyophilic viral elements of HIV-1 during infection either alone or combined in a wide comparison between cells highly susceptible to infection and more-restrictive primary cell targets of HIV-1 in vivo, such as primary blood lymphocytes (PBLs), monocyte-derived macrophages (MDM), and dendritic cells (DCs).In this study, we show that an HIV-1-derived virus in which the 2 NLSs of MA are mutated and the IN, Vpr, and cPPT-CTS elements are removed displays no detectable nuclear import defect in HeLa cells independently of their cycling status. However, this mutant virus is partially impaired for nuclear entry in primary cells and more specifically in DCs and PBLs. We found that this partial defect is specified by the cPPT-CTS, while the 3 remaining elements seem to play no role in nuclear import. Thus, our study indicates that the central DNA flap specifies the most important role among the viral elements involved thus far in nuclear import. However, it also clearly indicates that the role played by the central DNA flap is not absolute and that its importance varies depending on the cell type, independently from the dividing status of the cell.     

Simultaneous Cell-to-Cell Transmission of Human Immunodeficiency Virus to Multiple Targets through Polysynapses

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) efficiently propagates through cell-to-cell contacts, which include virological synapses (VS), filopodia, and nanotubes. Here, we quantified and characterized further these diverse modes of contact in lymphocytes. We report that viral transmission mainly occurs across VS and through “polysynapses,” a rosette-like structure formed between one infected cell and multiple adjacent recipients. Polysynapses are characterized by simultaneous HIV clustering and transfer at multiple membrane regions. HIV Gag proteins often adopt a ring-like supramolecular organization at sites of intercellular contacts and colocalize with CD63 tetraspanin and raft components GM1, Thy-1, and CD59. In donor cells engaged in polysynapses, there is no preferential accumulation of Gag proteins at contact sites facing the microtubule organizing center. The LFA-1 adhesion molecule, known to facilitate viral replication, enhances formation of polysynapses. Altogether, our results reveal an underestimated mode of viral transfer through polysynapses. In HIV-infected individuals, these structures, by promoting concomitant infection of multiple targets in the vicinity of infected cells, may facilitate exponential viral growth and escape from immune responses.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) mostly replicate in CD4⁺ memory T cells throughout the lymphoid tissues. A compartmentalization of HIV-1 quasispecies, associated with the presence of multiply infected cells, has been observed in microdissected splenic germinal centers (12), suggesting that viral dissemination occurs by local replication in nearby cells. Viral spread is driven by cell-free virions and, in a much more efficient and rapid way, through direct transfer of infection across cell-to-cell contacts (41, 44). Various modes of cell-to-cell HIV transfer in culture have been reported (1, 11, 13, 22, 33, 46, 49, 50). For instance, HIV-1 readily forms virological synapses (VS) at the interface between HIV-infected cells and targets (44). VS were initially described by Bangham et al., to characterize human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1) transfer in lymphocytes (20). The HIV-1 or HTLV-1 VS represents a polarized accumulation of viruses at the contact zone between one individual infected cell and one target. Regarding HIV-1, VS formation involves HIV Env-CD4-coreceptor interactions and requires cytoskeletal rearrangements and stabilization of cell junctions by adhesion molecules (3, 22-24). Interestingly, the VS likely allows HIV to evade antibody neutralization (3), although Env-independent mechanisms of viral transfer have been reported (11, 21). Interestingly, HIV dissemination through VS involves viral endocytosis in target cells (18, 43). Another mode of retroviral transfer involves the establishment of filopodial bridges (or viral cytonemes) between infected cells and targets (46). Viruses move along the outer surface of the bridge toward the target cell, in a kind of stretched-out VS (17). More recently, thinner structures called membrane nanotubes, which form when cells make contact and subsequently part, have been reported to mediate HIV spread (7, 50). Both filopodia and nanotubes might allow transfer to distant cells, as observed not only with retroviruses, but also with numerous viral species, like herpesvirus, papillomavirus, and vaccinia virus (5, 28, 34, 45, 47). Limiting cell contacts by gently agitating cells significantly reduces HIV spread in culture (49), but the relative contributions of VS, filopodia, and nanotubes to viral replication remain poorly understood.Here, we investigated HIV spread in CD4⁺ lymphocytes by combining diverse techniques of visualization (three-dimensional [3D] reconstructions of confocal immunofluorescence [IF], scanning electron microscopy [SEM], correlative IF-transmission electron microscopy [TEM], and real-time imaging of HIV Gag movements). We quantified the frequency of VS, filopodia, and nanotubes in culture. We identified in lymphocytes a poorly characterized structure of viral transmission that we termed “polysynapse,” in which one infected cell simultaneously transfers the virus to multiple adjacent recipients. We further describe some cellular and viral mechanisms involved in the formation of polysynapses.     

Mumps Virus Matrix,Fusion, and Nucleocapsid Proteins Cooperate for Efficient Production of Virus-Like Particles

Paramyxovirus particles, like other enveloped virus particles, are formed by budding from membranes of infected cells. To define mumps virus (MuV) proteins important for this process, viral proteins were expressed either singly or in combination in mammalian cells to produce virus-like particles (VLPs). Only the MuV matrix (M) protein when expressed by itself was capable of inducing particle release, but the quantity of these M-alone particles was very small. Efficient production of mumps VLPs occurred only when the M protein was coexpressed together with other viral proteins, with maximum production achieved upon coexpression of the viral M, nucleocapsid (NP), and fusion (F) proteins together. Electron microscopy analysis confirmed that VLPs were morphologically similar to MuV virions. The two MuV glycoproteins were not equal contributors to particle formation. The F protein was a major contributor to VLP production, while the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase protein made a smaller contribution. Evidence for the involvement of class E protein machinery in VLP budding was obtained, with mumps VLP production inhibited upon expression of dominant-negative versions of the class E proteins Vps4A and Chmp4b. Disruption of the sequence 24-FPVI-27 within the MuV M protein led to poor VLP production, consistent with findings of earlier studies of a related sequence, FPIV, important for the budding of parainfluenza virus 5. Together, these results demonstrate that different MuV structural proteins cooperate together for efficient particle production and that particle budding likely involves host class E protein machinery.Mumps virus (MuV) is a paramyxovirus from the Rubulavirus genus. Prior to mass vaccination, mumps was a very common childhood illness, with characteristic symptoms including fever, fatigue, and inflammation of the salivary glands. Less frequently, MuV infection results in serious complications including aseptic meningitis and encephalitis (22). Significant outbreaks of mumps have occurred recently in the United Kingdom (6), Canada (40), and the United States (7, 14), highlighting the continued relevance of this disease even in countries where vaccination is widespread. Like other paramyxoviruses, MuV possesses a genome that consists of single-stranded negative-sense RNA, encapsidated by a nucleocapsid (NP) protein and associated with an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase complex composed of large protein and phosphoprotein subunits. This core is linked to the virion membrane by matrix (M) protein. The outer surface of the virion is covered with glycoprotein spikes consisting of the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) protein, which binds sialic acid to allow virion attachment to cells, and fusion (F) protein, which induces viral and cellular membranes to fuse together during virus entry. Additional components of MuV include the small hydrophobic protein, which prevents infected cells from undergoing apoptosis (67), and V protein, which prevents induction of interferon-induced antiviral responses (29, 30, 62). The late steps of the MuV life cycle that allow for assembly and budding of MuV virions remain for the most part unexplored.Enveloped virus particles are formed by budding from cellular membranes at specific locations at which viral proteins, and often host factors, have assembled together. For the negative-strand RNA viruses, coordination among the different viral components during virus assembly appears to be directed by the viral matrix proteins, which have the potential to interact with the cytoplasmic tails of the viral glycoproteins and with viral ribonucleoproteins (RNPs) in the cytoplasms of infected cells. M proteins likely assemble as layers beneath the plasma membranes of infected cells and induce other viral components to gather at these locations, from which virus budding occurs (reviewed in references 49 and 57).For many viruses, it has been possible to achieve assembly and budding of particles from cells that have been transfected to produce one or more viral proteins in the absence of virus infection. These particles often resemble virions morphologically and have been termed virus-like particles (VLPs). VLP production provides a useful means for determining the individual roles of different virus proteins in particle formation, and in some cases the VLPs themselves have shown promise as vaccines (45). For most negative-strand RNA viruses, VLP formation is critically dependent on the presence of the viral matrix proteins (49). Indeed, in the cases of Newcastle disease virus (NDV) (37) and Nipah virus (11, 38), M protein expression is sufficient for highly efficient VLP production, with no apparent need for assistance from any of the other viral structural components, such as the viral glycoproteins or NP proteins. In the case of NDV, incorporation of glycoproteins and NP proteins into the budding VLPs requires specific interactions involving the M protein, but these interactions do not appear to facilitate the budding process itself (37).Although expression of viral matrix protein is sufficient for robust VLP production in the above cases, it has long been thought that additional viral components are also important for efficient budding of many negative-strand RNA viruses. For example, an important role for viral glycoproteins in virus assembly has been established based on studies with recombinant viruses that contain glycoproteins lacking their cytoplasmic tails (4, 17, 26, 34, 35, 48, 52, 66) and analyses of assembly-defective subacute sclerosing panencephalitis measles virus strains (5, 47). In fact, recent evidence suggests that for influenza virus it is the viral glycoproteins (and not viral matrix protein) that are the main drivers of virus budding (9). For other negative-strand RNA viruses, expression of viral glycoproteins together with matrix proteins in some cases significantly enhances the efficiency of VLP release. Ebola VLPs (31), Sendai VLPs (55, 56), and parainfluenza virus 5 (PIV5)-like particles (51) are all produced more efficiently in the presence of viral glycoprotein expression. Ebola virus glycoprotein in some cell types functions during virus release to inhibit the action of tetherin, a cellular protein which functions to prevent the release of enveloped virus particles from infected cells (28). In addition to the viral glycoproteins, other viral components can also enhance the production of VLPs. Production of Ebola VLPs and PIV5-like particles can be further enhanced through expression of the corresponding NP proteins (31, 51), and Sendai VLP production is enhanced through expression of Sendai virus C protein (55). Hence, for these viruses, multiple proteins cooperate with one another to achieve maximum VLP production. The extent to which particle formation actually requires this cooperation differs, however. In the case of PIV5, it is absolutely essential; expression of the M protein alone does not lead to VLP production (51). On the other hand, cooperation among viral proteins is beneficial but not strictly required for the production of Sendai or Ebola VLPs, since expression of the matrix proteins of these viruses is sufficient for VLP production (20, 55, 56, 61).The late steps of negative-strand RNA virus budding may occur in a way that is analogous to the budding of retroviruses, which employ protein-protein interaction domains called late domains to manipulate host machinery and allow release of virus particles (reviewed in references 1 and 3). Cellular factors recruited by late domains in many cases are class E proteins that are part of the vacuolar protein sorting (Vps) pathway of the cell. Indeed, disruption of the Vps pathway through expression of dominant-negative (DN) versions of the Vps4 ATPase protein blocks the budding of many retroviruses (reviewed in reference 1), as well as the budding of Ebola virus (32), Lassa fever virus (63), and PIV5 (50). However, other negative-strand RNA viruses, such as influenza virus, bud particles in ways that are not substantially affected by disruption of the cellular Vps pathway (reviewed in reference 8).Here, experiments are described which define MuV proteins important for the assembly and budding of VLPs. Using proteins derived from the 88-1961 wild-type (wt) strain of MuV, optimal production of mumps VLPs is shown to occur upon coexpression of the MuV M, F, and NP proteins together in transiently transfected mammalian cells. Evidence is also provided that supports a role for cellular class E protein machinery in the budding of mumps VLPs.     

HIV-1 Nef Inhibits Ruffles,Induces Filopodia,and Modulates Migration of Infected Lymphocytes

The HIV-1 Nef protein is a pathogenic factor modulating the behavior of infected cells. Nef induces actin cytoskeleton changes and impairs cell migration toward chemokines. We further characterized the morphology, cytoskeleton dynamics, and motility of HIV-1-infected lymphocytes. By using scanning electron microscopy, confocal immunofluorescence microscopy, and ImageStream technology, which combines flow cytometry and automated imaging, we report that HIV-1 induces a characteristic remodeling of the actin cytoskeleton. In infected lymphocytes, ruffle formation is inhibited, whereas long, thin filopodium-like protrusions are induced. Cells infected with HIV with nef deleted display a normal phenotype, and Nef expression alone, in the absence of other viral proteins, induces morphological changes. We also used an innovative imaging system to immobilize and visualize living individual cells in suspension. When combined with confocal “axial tomography,” this technique greatly enhances three-dimensional optical resolution. With this technique, we confirmed the induction of long filopodium-like structures in unfixed Nef-expressing lymphocytes. The cytoskeleton reorganization induced by Nef is associated with an important impairment of cell movements. The adhesion and spreading of infected cells to fibronectin, their spontaneous motility, and their migration toward chemokines (CXCL12, CCL3, and CCL19) were all significantly decreased. Therefore, Nef induces complex effects on the lymphocyte actin cytoskeleton and cellular morphology, which likely impacts the capacity of infected cells to circulate and to encounter and communicate with bystander cells.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) mostly replicates in T-cell areas of secondary lymphoid organs (SLOs) and induces pathological changes in their architecture. Such changes are likely due to a combination of events, including destruction of T cells, chronic immune activation, and alteration of T-cell motility toward and inside the SLOs (27, 37, 50, 53). Indeed, to fulfill their immune surveillance role, T cells continuously circulate in and out of blood, lymph nodes (LNs), and tissues (60).Lymphocyte recruitment from the bloodstream into LNs depends on three distinct processes, i.e., attachment to high endothelial venules (HEVs), extravasation, and cell migration (10, 60). Adhesion to the endothelium and extracellular matrix (ECM) is a crucial step, regulated in part by β1 integrins, α4β1 (VLA-4) and α5β1, that bind VCAM-1 and/or fibronectin (56). Chemokines and their Gαi-protein-coupled receptors are key regulators of lymphocyte trafficking (32). For instance, CCL19 and CCL21 are constitutively produced by HEVs and by fibroblastic reticular cells of T-cell areas of LNs (21, 28, 29). These two chemokines share the receptor CCR7, expressed by naïve T cells and a fraction of memory T cells (47). They play a major role in lymphocyte homing to LNs, in steady state as well as under conditions of inflammation, and may control T-cell positioning within defined functional compartments (1, 17, 18, 47). CXCR4 and its ligand CXCL12/SDF-1 also contribute to T-cell entry into LNs (5, 23, 40). In addition, effector and memory T cells express a broad range of receptors binding inflammatory chemokines, such as the CCR5 ligands CCL3 (MIP1α), CCL4 (MIP1β), and CCL5 (Rantes).Efficient accomplishment of lymphocyte migration and immune functions requires tight regulation of the cellular cytoskeleton (59). This is mediated by the small GTPases of the Rho subfamily, such as Rho, Rac, and Cdc42 (11, 58). They activate specific actin filament assembly factors to generate sheet-like protrusive structures (such as lamellipodia and ruffles) and finger-like protrusions (such as filopodia and microvilli) (6). These structures have different functions. Lamellipodia and ruffles are formed during crawling cell motility and spreading. Filopodia protrude from the leading edges of many motile cells. They appear to perform sensory and exploratory functions to steer cells, depending on cues from the environment (42). Moreover, filopodia, or other thin structures called tunneling nanotubes, have been shown to form intercellular bridges, allowing viruses to spread through remote contacts between infected cells and targets (44, 48, 49, 52).HIV-1 hijacks cytoskeleton dynamics in order to ensure viral entry and transport within and egress from target cells (34; reviewed in reference 13). In particular, the viral protein Nef modifies actin remodeling in various cell systems. In T cells, Nef alters actin rearrangements triggered by activation of T-cell (TCR) or chemokine receptors (22, 54). Nef inhibits immunological synapse formation, a dynamic process involving rapid actin modifications (57). Nef also affects plasma membrane plasticity, inducing secretion of microvesicle clusters (33). In macrophages, Nef induces the extension of long intercellular conduits allowing its own transfer to B cells (61). A number of studies have reported that Nef affects T-cell chemotaxis (generally to CXCL12) through the modulation of Rho-GTPase-regulated signaling pathways (7, 24, 39, 54). Migration studies have generally been performed using Nef-expressing cells, and rarely in the context of HIV-1 infection (54). From a molecular standpoint, it has recently been proposed that Nef acts in part by deregulating cofilin, an actin-depolymerizing factor that promotes actin turnover and subsequent cell motility (54).In the present study, our goal was to gain further insights into the effect of HIV-1 infection on cytoskeleton dynamics. We used a panel of innovative techniques allowing analysis of cell shape, adhesion, and motility. We report that in HIV-infected lymphocytes, Nef promotes filopodium-like formation while it inhibits membrane ruffling. Nef impairs cell adhesion on the extracellular matrix and decreases intrinsic cell motility. Lymphocyte migration toward various chemokines (CXCL12, CCL3, and CCL19) is also inhibited. Our results suggest that Nef may facilitate viral spread and contribute to AIDS pathogenesis by manipulating the migration of lymphocytes.     

Envelope-Modified Single-Cycle Simian Immunodeficiency Virus Selectively Enhances Antibody Responses and Partially Protects against Repeated,Low-Dose Vaginal Challenge

Immunization of rhesus macaques with strains of simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) that are limited to a single cycle of infection elicits T-cell responses to multiple viral gene products and antibodies capable of neutralizing lab-adapted SIV, but not neutralization-resistant primary isolates of SIV. In an effort to improve upon the antibody responses, we immunized rhesus macaques with three strains of single-cycle SIV (scSIV) that express envelope glycoproteins modified to lack structural features thought to interfere with the development of neutralizing antibodies. These envelope-modified strains of scSIV lacked either five potential N-linked glycosylation sites in gp120, three potential N-linked glycosylation sites in gp41, or 100 amino acids in the V1V2 region of gp120. Three doses consisting of a mixture of the three envelope-modified strains of scSIV were administered on weeks 0, 6, and 12, followed by two booster inoculations with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) G trans-complemented scSIV on weeks 18 and 24. Although this immunization regimen did not elicit antibodies capable of detectably neutralizing SIV_mac239 or SIV_mac251_UCD, neutralizing antibody titers to the envelope-modified strains were selectively enhanced. Virus-specific antibodies and T cells were observed in the vaginal mucosa. After 20 weeks of repeated, low-dose vaginal challenge with SIV_mac251_UCD, six of eight immunized animals versus six of six naïve controls became infected. Although immunization did not significantly reduce the likelihood of acquiring immunodeficiency virus infection, statistically significant reductions in peak and set point viral loads were observed in the immunized animals relative to the naïve control animals.Development of a safe and effective vaccine for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) is an urgent public health priority, but remains a formidable scientific challenge. Passive transfer experiments in macaques demonstrate neutralizing antibodies can prevent infection by laboratory-engineered simian-human immunodeficiency virus (SHIV) strains (6, 33, 34, 53, 59). However, no current vaccine approach is capable of eliciting antibodies that neutralize primary isolates with neutralization-resistant envelope glycoproteins. Virus-specific T-cell responses can be elicited by prime-boost strategies utilizing recombinant DNA and/or viral vectors (3, 10, 11, 16, 36, 73, 77, 78), which confer containment of viral loads following challenge with SHIV_89.6P (3, 13, 66, 68). Unfortunately, similar vaccine regimens are much less effective against SIV_mac239 and SIV_mac251 (12, 16, 31, 36, 73), which bear closer resemblance to most transmitted HIV-1 isolates in their inability to utilize CXCR4 as a coreceptor (18, 23, 24, 88) and inherent high degree of resistance to neutralization by antibodies or soluble CD4 (43, 55, 56). Live, attenuated SIV can provide apparent sterile protection against challenge with SIV_mac239 and SIV_mac251 or at least contain viral replication below the limit of detection (20, 22, 80). Due to the potential of the attenuated viruses themselves to cause disease in neonatal rhesus macaques (5, 7, 81) and to revert to a pathogenic phenotype through the accumulation of mutations over prolonged periods of replication in adult animals (2, 35, 76), attenuated HIV-1 is not under consideration for use in humans.As an experimental vaccine approach designed to retain many of the features of live, attenuated SIV, without the risk of reversion to a pathogenic phenotype, we and others devised genetic approaches for producing strains of SIV that are limited to a single cycle of infection (27, 28, 30, 38, 39, 45). In a previous study, immunization of rhesus macaques with single-cycle SIV (scSIV) trans-complemented with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) G elicited potent virus-specific T-cell responses (39), which were comparable in magnitude to T-cell responses elicited by optimized prime-boost regimens based on recombinant DNA and viral vectors (3, 16, 36, 68, 73, 78). Antibodies were elicited that neutralized lab-adapted SIV_mac251_LA (39). However, despite the presentation of the native, trimeric SIV envelope glycoprotein (Env) on the surface of infected cells and virions, none of the scSIV-immunized macaques developed antibody responses that neutralized SIV_mac239 (39). Therefore, we have now introduced Env modifications into scSIV that facilitate the development of neutralizing antibodies.Most primate lentiviral envelope glycoproteins are inherently resistant to neutralizing antibodies due to structural and thermodynamic properties that have evolved to enable persistent replication in the face of vigorous antibody responses (17, 46, 47, 64, 71, 75, 79, 83, 85). Among these, extensive N-linked glycosylation renders much of the Env surface inaccessible to antibodies (17, 48, 60, 63, 75). Removal of N-linked glycans from gp120 or gp41 by mutagenesis facilitates the induction of antibodies to epitopes that are occluded by these carbohydrates in the wild-type virus (64, 85). Consequently, antibodies from animals infected with glycan-deficient strains neutralize these strains better than antibodies from animals infected with the fully glycosylated SIV_mac239 parental strain (64, 85). Most importantly with regard to immunogen design, animals infected with the glycan-deficient strains developed higher neutralizing antibody titers against wild-type SIV_mac239 (64, 85). Additionally, the removal of a single N-linked glycan in gp120 enhanced the induction of neutralizing antibodies against SHIV_89.6P and SHIV_SF162 in a prime-boost strategy by 20-fold (50). These observations suggest that potential neutralization determinants accessible in the wild-type Env are poorly immunogenic unless specific N-linked glycans in gp120 and gp41 are eliminated by mutagenesis.The variable loop regions 1 and 2 (V1V2) of HIV-1 and SIV gp120 may also interfere with the development of neutralizing antibodies. Deletion of V1V2 from HIV-1 gp120 permitted neutralizing monoclonal antibodies to CD4-inducible epitopes to bind to gp120 in the absence of CD4, suggesting that V1V2 occludes potential neutralization determinants prior to the engagement of CD4 (82). A deletion in V2 of HIV-1 Env-exposed epitopes was conserved between clades (69), improved the ability of a secreted Env trimer to elicit neutralizing antibodies (9), and was present in a vaccine that conferred complete protection against SHIV_SF162P4 (8). A deletion of 100 amino acids in V1V2 of SIV_mac239 rendered the virus sensitive to monoclonal antibodies with various specificities (41). Furthermore, three of five macaques experimentally infected with SIV_mac239 with V1V2 deleted resisted superinfection with wild-type SIV_mac239 (51). Thus, occlusion of potential neutralization determinants by the V1V2 loop structure may contribute to the poor immunogenicity of the wild-type envelope glycoprotein.Here we tested the hypothesis that antibody responses to scSIV could be improved by immunizing macaques with strains of scSIV engineered to eliminate structural features that interfere with the development of neutralizing antibodies. Antibodies to Env-modified strains were selectively enhanced, but these did not neutralize the wild-type SIV strains. We then tested the hypothesis that immunization might prevent infection in a repeated, low-dose vaginal challenge model of heterosexual HIV-1 transmission. Indeed, while all six naïve control animals became infected, two of eight immunized animals remained uninfected after 20 weeks of repeated vaginal challenge. Relative to the naïve control group, reductions in peak and set point viral loads were statistically significant in the immunized animals that became infected.     

Virological Synapse-Mediated Spread of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 between T Cells Is Sensitive to Entry Inhibition

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) can disseminate between CD4⁺ T cells via diffusion-limited cell-free viral spread or by directed cell-cell transfer using virally induced structures termed virological synapses. Although T-cell virological synapses have been well characterized, it is unclear whether this mode of viral spread is susceptible to inhibition by neutralizing antibodies and entry inhibitors. We show here that both cell-cell and cell-free viral spread are equivalently sensitive to entry inhibition. Fluorescence imaging analysis measuring virological synapse lifetimes and inhibitor time-of-addition studies implied that inhibitors can access preformed virological synapses and interfere with HIV-1 cell-cell infection. This concept was supported by electron tomography that revealed the T-cell virological synapse to be a relatively permeable structure. Virological synapse-mediated HIV-1 spread is thus efficient but is not an immune or entry inhibitor evasion mechanism, a result that is encouraging for vaccine and drug design.As with enveloped viruses from several viral families, the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) can disseminate both by fluid-phase diffusion of viral particles and by directed cell-cell transfer (39). The primary target cell for HIV-1 replication in vivo is the CD4⁺ T-cell (13), which is infectible by CCR5-tropic (R5) and CXCR4-tropic (X4) viral variants (29). R5 HIV-1 is the major transmitted viral phenotype and dominates the global pandemic, whereas X4 virus is found later in infection in ca. 50% of infected individuals, and its presence indicates a poor disease progression prognosis (23). Cell-cell HIV-1 transfer between T cells is more efficient than diffusion-limited spread (8, 16, 32, 38), although recent estimates for the differential range from approximately 1 (42) to 4 (6) orders of magnitude. Two structures have been proposed to support contact-mediated intercellular movement of HIV-1 between T cells: membrane nanotubes (33, 43) and macromolecular adhesive contacts termed virological synapses (VS) (15, 17, 33). VS appear to be the dominant structure involved in T-cell-T-cell spread (33), and both X4 (17) and R5 HIV-1 (6, 15, 42) can spread between T cells via this mechanism.VS assembly and function are dependent on HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein (Env) engaging its primary cellular receptor CD4 (2, 6, 17). This interaction recruits more CD4 and coreceptor to the site of cell-cell contact in an actin-dependent manner (17). Adhesion molecules cluster at the intercellular junction and are thought to stabilize the VS (18). In parallel, viral Env and Gag are recruited to the interface by a microtubule-dependent mechanism (19), where polarized viral budding may release virions into the synaptic space across which the target cell is infected (17). The precise mechanism by which HIV-1 subsequently enters the target T-cell cytoplasm remains unclear: by fusion directly at the plasma membrane, fusion from within an endosomal compartment, or both (4, 6, 15, 25, 34).Viruses from diverse families including herpesviruses (9), poxviruses (22) and hepatitis C virus (44) evade neutralizing antibody attack by direct cell-cell spread, since the tight junctions across which the these viruses move are antibody impermeable. It has been speculated that transfer of HIV-1 across VS may promote evasion from immune or therapeutic intervention with the inference that the junctions formed in retroviral VS may be nonpermissive to antibody entry (39). However, available evidence regarding whether neutralizing antibodies (NAb) and other entry inhibitors can inhibit HIV-1 cell-cell spread is inconsistent (25). An early analysis suggested that HIV-1 T-cell-T-cell spread is relatively resistant to neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (NMAb) (12). A later study agreed with this conclusion by demonstrating a lack of permissivity of HIV-1 T-cell-T-cell spread, measured by transfer of viral Gag, to interference with viral fusion using a gp41-specific NMAb and a peptidic fusion inhibitor (6). In contrast, another analysis reported that anti-gp41-specific NMAb interfered effectively with HIV-1 spread between T cells (26). Inhibitors of the HIV-1 surface glycoprotein (gp120)-CD4 or gp120-CXCR4 interaction reduced X4 HIV-1 VS assembly and viral transfer if applied prior to mixing of infected and receptor-expressing target cells (17, 19), but the effect of these inhibitors has not been tested on preformed VS. Thus, the field is currently unclear on whether direct T-cell-T-cell infectious HIV-1 spread is susceptible or not to antibody and entry inhibitor-mediated disruption of VS assembly, and the related question, whether the VS is permeable to viral entry inhibitors, including NAb. Addressing these questions is of central importance to understanding HIV-1 pathogenesis and informing future drug and vaccine design.Since estimates reported in the literature of the relative efficiency of direct HIV-1 T-cell-T-cell spread compared to cell-free spread vary by approximately 3 orders of magnitude (6, 38, 42), and the evidence for the activity of viral entry inhibitors on cell-cell spread is conflicting, we set out to quantify the efficiency of infection across the T-cell VS and analyze the susceptibility of this structure to NAb and viral entry inhibitors. Assays reporting on events proximal to productive infection show that the R5 HIV-1 T-cell VS is approximately 1 order of magnitude more efficient than cell-free virus infection, and imaging analyses reveal that the VS assembled by HIV-1 is most likely permeable to inhibitors both during, and subsequent to, VS assembly. Thus, we conclude that the T-cell VS does not provide a privileged environment allowing HIV-1 escape from entry inhibition.     

Poxvirus Complement Control Proteins Are Expressed on the Cell Surface through an Intermolecular Disulfide Bridge with the Viral A56 Protein

The vaccinia virus (VACV) complement control protein (VCP) is an immunomodulatory protein that is both secreted from and expressed on the surface of infected cells. Surface expression of VCP occurs though an interaction with the viral transmembrane protein A56 and is dependent on a free N-terminal cysteine of VCP. Although A56 and VCP have been shown to interact in infected cells, the mechanism remains unclear. To investigate if A56 is sufficient for surface expression, we transiently expressed VCP and A56 in eukaryotic cell lines and found that they interact on the cell surface in the absence of other viral proteins. Since A56 contains three extracellular cysteines, we hypothesized that one of the cysteines may be unpaired and could therefore form a disulfide bridge with VCP. To test this, we generated a series of A56 mutants in which each cysteine was mutated to a serine, and we found that mutation of cysteine 162 abrogated VCP cell surface expression. We also tested the ability of other poxvirus complement control proteins to bind to VACV A56. While the smallpox homolog of VCP is able to bind VACV A56, the ectromelia virus (ECTV) VCP homolog is only able to bind the ECTV homolog of A56, indicating that these proteins may have coevolved. Surface expression of poxvirus complement control proteins may have important implications in viral pathogenesis, as a virus that does not express cell surface VCP is attenuated in vivo. This suggests that surface expression of VCP may contribute to poxvirus pathogenesis.Poxviruses, including vaccinia virus (VACV), encode large numbers of immunomodulatory proteins that help them establish an infection and combat the host''s immune response (10, 32). One of these is the vaccinia virus complement control protein (VCP), which is both secreted from and expressed on the surface of infected cells (9, 14, 16, 17). VCP acts against the complement system, a series of soluble proteins that is an important early component of the innate immune system and also shapes adaptive immune responses (15, 42, 43). In response to viral infection, complement can opsonize or inactivate virions and can lyse enveloped virus or infected cells (1, 3, 7, 12). Because of these pressures, a number of viruses, including herpes simplex virus, flaviviruses, and poxviruses, encode novel or host-derived regulators of complement, while others, including HIV and poxviruses, incorporate host complement regulatory proteins into virus particles (7, 11, 31, 39). Many orthopoxviruses encode a complement regulator (8, 20, 23, 29), and the most studied of these is VCP. Structurally, VCP is made up of four short consensus repeats (SCR) that are the basic units of mammalian complement regulators (17, 25), and VCP has been shown to interfere with the complement cascade at multiple steps (2, 16, 20-22, 25, 28-30, 33). Additionally, a VCP knockout virus generates smaller lesions in animal models (14, 16). While some host complement control proteins (CCPs) are secreted, many contain transmembrane domains (or a glycophosphatidylinositol anchor) and are thus expressed on the cell surface (42, 43). Thus, when we found that VCP is also expressed on the infected cell surface and protects infected cells from complement-mediated lysis in vitro (9), we believed this to be an important interaction that required further investigation. We previously found that the N-terminal cysteine on VCP was needed for surface expression and that the VACV transmembrane protein A56 was also required (9). The vaccinia virus A56 protein is a type 1 transmembrane glycoprotein that is found on the surface of infected cells and on extracellular virus particles (4, 18, 26, 27, 36). It interacts with another viral protein, K2 (19, 37, 45), which lacks a transmembrane domain and binds to A56 noncovalently (36). The A56/K2 complex prevents syncytium formation between infected cells and superinfection by interacting with the vaccinia virus entry/fusion complex on virions (24, 38, 40, 41). Here we provide evidence that the N-terminal cysteine on VCP forms an intermolecular disulfide bond with cysteine 162 on the ectodomain of A56. We also demonstrate that similar interactions can occur with other poxvirus CCPs, as the smallpox virus and ectromelia virus homologs of VCP also exhibit A56-dependent surface expression.     

Detection of Infectious Adenoviruses in Environmental Waters by Fluorescence-Activated Cell Sorting Assay

Methods for rapid detection and quantification of infectious viruses in the environment are urgently needed for public health protection. A fluorescence-activated cell-sorting (FACS) assay was developed to detect infectious adenoviruses (Ads) based on the expression of viral protein during replication in cells. The assay was first developed using recombinant Ad serotype 5 (rAd5) with the E1A gene replaced by a green fluorescent protein (GFP) gene. Cells infected with rAd5 express GFP, which is captured and quantified by FACS. The results showed that rAd5 can be detected at concentrations of 1 to 10⁴ PFU per assay within 3 days, demonstrating a linear correlation between the viral concentration and the number of GFP-positive cells with an r² value of >0.9. Following the same concept, FACS assays using fluorescently labeled antibodies specific to the E1A and hexon proteins, respectively, were developed. Assays targeting hexon showed greater sensitivity than assays targeting E1A. The results demonstrated that as little as 1 PFU Ads was detected by FACS within 3 days based on hexon protein, with an r² value greater than 0.9 over a 4-log concentration range. Application of this method to environmental samples indicated positive detection of infectious Ads in 50% of primary sewage samples and 33% of secondary treated sewage samples, but none were found in 12 seawater samples. The infectious Ads ranged in quantity between 10 and 165 PFU/100 ml of sewage samples. The results indicate that the FACS assay is a rapid quantification tool for detecting infectious Ads in environmental samples and also represents a considerable advancement for rapid environmental monitoring of infectious viruses.Waterborne viral infection is one of the most important causes of human morbidity in the world. There are hundreds of different types of human viruses present in human sewage, which, if improperly treated, may become the source of contamination in drinking and recreational waters (6, 12, 19). Furthermore, as water scarcity intensifies in the nation, so has consideration of wastewater reuse as a valid and essential alternative for resolving water shortages (31).Currently, routine viral monitoring is not required for drinking or recreational waters, nor is it required for wastewater that is discharged into the environment. This lack of a monitoring effort is due largely to the lack of methods that can rapidly and sensitively detect infectious viruses in environmental samples. In the past 20 years, tremendous progress has been made in detection of viruses in the environment based on molecular technology (32, 33, 35). PCR and quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) methods have improved both the speed and sensitivity of viral detection compared with detection by the traditional tissue culture method (2, 11, 17, 18). However, they provide little information on viral infectivity, which is crucial for human health risk assessment (22-24, 35). Our previous work using a real-time PCR assay to detect human adenoviruses (Ads) in sewage could not differentiate the infectious viruses in the secondary treated sewage from those killed by chlorination disinfection (15). In this research, we pursued an innovative approach to detecting infectious viruses in water using fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS). This method is rapid and sensitive, with an established record in microbiological research (29, 34, 39).FACS is a specialized type of flow cytometry which provides a method for counting and sorting a heterogeneous mixture of biological cells into two or more kinds, one cell at a time, based upon the specific light-scattering and fluorescent characteristics of each cell (4, 25, 34, 38). It is a useful method since it provides fast and quantitative recording of fluorescent signals from individual cells (14, 16, 34, 47). The FACS viral assay is based on the expression of viral protein inside the recipient cell during viral replication (16). Specific antibody labeled with fluorescence is bound to the target viral protein, which results in fluorescence emission from infected cells. Viral particles outside the cell will not be captured, because the size of virus is below the detection limit of flow cytometry. Therefore, detection of cells, which can be captured with fluorescently labeled viral antibody, is a definitive indication of the presence of infectious virus.This research used human Ads as the target for development of the FACS method. The rationale for this choice is as follows. (i) Ads are important human pathogens that may be transmitted by water consumption and water spray (aerosols) (26, 32). The health hazard associated with exposure to Ads has been demonstrated by epidemiological data and clinical research (1, 7, 9, 35, 40, 43). (ii) Ads are among the most prevalent human viruses identified in human sewage and are frequently detected in marine waters and the Great Lakes (17, 32, 33, 35). (iii) Ads are more resistant to UV disinfection than any other bacteria or viruses (3, 5, 10, 24, 41, 42, 44). Thus, they may survive wastewater treatment as increasing numbers of wastewater treatment facilities switch from chlorination to UV to avoid disinfection by-products. (iv) Some serotypes of Ads, including enteric Ad 40 and 41, are fastidious. They are difficult to detect by plaque assay, and a routine assay of infectivity takes 7 to 14 days (8, 20).In this study, recombinant Ad serotype 5 (rAd5) with the E1A gene (the first transcribed gene after infection) replaced by a green fluorescent protein (GFP) gene was first used to test for sensitivity and speed of the assay. Two other viral proteins were then used as targets for development of FACS assays using Ad serotype 2 (Ad2) and Ad41. This study demonstrated the feasibility, sensitivity, and reliability of the assay for detection of infectious Ads in environmental samples.