Antagonism to and Intracellular Sequestration of Human Tetherin by the Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 2 Envelope Glycoprotein

Tetherin (CD317/BST-2), an interferon-induced membrane protein, restricts the release of nascent retroviral particles from infected cell surfaces. While human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) encodes the accessory gene vpu to overcome the action of tetherin, the lineage of primate lentiviruses that gave rise to HIV-2 does not. It has been previously reported that the HIV-2 envelope glycoprotein has a Vpu-like function in promoting virus release. Here we demonstrate that the HIV-2 Rod envelope glycoprotein (HIV-2 Rod Env) is a tetherin antagonist. Expression of HIV-2 Rod Env, but not that of HIV-1 or the closely related simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) SIVmac1A11, counteracts tetherin-mediated restriction of Vpu-defective HIV-1 in a cell-type-specific manner. This correlates with the ability of the HIV-2 Rod Env to mediate cell surface downregulation of tetherin. Antagonism requires an endocytic motif conserved across HIV/SIV lineages in the gp41 cytoplasmic tail, but specificity for tetherin is governed by extracellular determinants in the mature Env protein. Coimmunoprecipitation studies suggest an interaction between HIV-2 Rod Env and tetherin, but unlike studies with Vpu, we found no evidence of tetherin degradation. In the presence of HIV-2 Rod Env, tetherin localization is restricted to the trans-Golgi network, suggesting Env-mediated effects on tetherin trafficking sequester it from virus assembly sites on the plasma membrane. Finally, we recapitulated these observations in HIV-2-infected CD4⁺ T-cell lines, demonstrating that tetherin antagonism and sequestration occur at physiological levels of Env expression during virus replication.Various stages of the replication cycle of primate lentiviruses can be targeted by host antiviral restriction factors (reviewed in reference 49). In addition to the well-characterized antiviral effects of members of the APOBEC3 family of cytidine deaminases, particularly APOBEC3G and -3F, and species-specific variants of tripartite motif family 5α, the release of nascent retroviral particles has recently been shown to be a target for a novel restriction factor, tetherin (CD317/bone marrow stromal cell antigen 2 [BST-2]) (31, 46). Tetherin is an interferon-inducible gene that was originally shown to impart a restriction on the release of mutants of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) that lack a vpu gene (31, 46). In tetherin-positive cells, mature Vpu-defective HIV-1 particles are retained on the cell surface, linked to the plasma membrane (PM) and each other via protease-sensitive tethers, and can be subsequently endocytosed and accumulate in late endosomes (30, 31). Tetherin is not HIV specific and restricts the release of virus-like particles derived from all retroviruses tested (18), as well as those of filoviruses and arenaviruses (18, 19, 39).Tetherin is a small (181-amino-acid) type II membrane protein with an unusual topology that exists mainly as a disulfide-linked dimer (34). It consists of an N-terminal cytoplasmic tail, a transmembrane anchor, an extracellular domain that includes three cysteine residues important for dimerization, a putative coiled-coil, and finally a glycophosphatidyinosityl-linked lipid anchor (22) that is essential for restriction (31). Tetherin localizes to retroviral assembly sites on the PM (18, 31), and this unusual structure is highly suggestive that tetherin restricts virion release by incorporation into the viral membrane and cross-linking virions to cells. Such a mechanism would make tetherin a powerful antiviral effector that can target an obligate part of most, if not all, enveloped virus assembly strategies. Moreover, since tetherin restriction has no specific requirement for virus protein sequences, to avoid its action, mammalian viruses have evolved to encode several distinct countermeasures that specifically inhibit tetherin''s antiviral function.The Vpu accessory protein antagonizes tetherin-mediated restriction of HIV-1 (31, 46). In the presence of Vpu, tetherin is downregulated from the cell surface (2, 46) and is targeted for degradation (10, 13, 14), although whether these processes are required for antagonism of tetherin function is unclear (27). HIV-1 Vpu displays a distinct species specificity in that it is unable to target tetherin orthologues from rhesus macaques or African green monkeys (14, 25). This differential sensitivity maps to the tetherin transmembrane domain, particularly residues that are predicted to have been under high positive selection pressure during primate evolution (14, 16, 25). This suggests that tetherin evolution may have been driven in part by viral countermeasures like Vpu. Vpu, however, is only encoded by HIV-1 and its direct simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) lineage precursors. The majority of SIVs, including the SIVsm, the progenitor of both HIV-2 and SIVmac, do not encode a Vpu protein (21). In some of these SIVs, tetherin antagonism was recently shown to map to the nef gene (16, 51). SIV Nef proteins, however, are generally ineffective against human tetherin because they target a (G/D)DIWK motif that was deleted from the human tetherin cytoplasmic tail sometime after the divergence of humans and chimpanzees (51). This raises the question of how HIV-2 is able to overcome human tetherin, as recent data show chronically HIV-2-infected CEM T cells have reduced tetherin levels on their surface (10).Interestingly, it has long been known that the envelope glycoprotein of certain HIV-2 isolates can stimulate the release of Vpu-defective HIV-1 virions from cells we now know to be tetherin positive (5, 6, 43). HIV and SIV Envs form trimeric spikes of dimers of the surface subunit (SU-gp105 in HIV-2/SIVmac and gp120 in HIV-1) that bind CD4 and the chemokine coreceptor and gp41 (the transmembrane [TM] subunit that facilitates fusion with and entry into the target cell). Envelope precursors (gp140 or gp160) are synthesized in the endoplasmic reticulum, where they become glycosylated and are exported to the surface via the secretory pathway (8). During transit through the Golgi apparatus and possibly in endosomal compartments, the immature precursors are cleaved by furin-like proteases to form mature spikes (15, 29). Multiple endocytosis motifs in the gp41 cytoplasmic tail lead to only minor quantities of Env being exposed at the cell surface at any given time (7, 40). Recent data demonstrated that the conserved GYxxθ motif, a binding site for the clathrin adaptor protein AP-2 (3), in the membrane-proximal region of HIV-2 gp41 is required to promote Vpu-defective HIV-1 release from HeLa cells (1, 32). Based on experiments with HIV-1/HIV-2 chimeric envelopes, an additional requirement in the extracellular component was suggested (1). In this study we set out to examine the Vpu-like activity of HIV-2 envelope in light of the discovery of tetherin. We demonstrate that the HIV-2 Env is a tetherin antagonist, and we provide mechanistic insight into the basis of this antagonism.     

Cell-Cell Spread of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Overcomes Tetherin/BST-2-Mediated Restriction in T cells

Direct cell-to-cell spread of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) between T cells at the virological synapse (VS) is an efficient mechanism of viral dissemination. Tetherin (BST-2/CD317) is an interferon-induced, antiretroviral restriction factor that inhibits nascent cell-free particle release. The HIV-1 Vpu protein antagonizes tetherin activity; however, whether tetherin also restricts cell-cell spread is unclear. We performed quantitative cell-to-cell transfer analysis of wild-type (WT) or Vpu-defective HIV-1 in Jurkat and primary CD4⁺ T cells, both of which express endogenous levels of tetherin. We found that Vpu-defective HIV-1 appeared to disseminate more efficiently by cell-to-cell contact between Jurkat cells under conditions where tetherin restricted cell-free virion release. In T cells infected with Vpu-defective HIV-1, tetherin was enriched at the VS, and VS formation was increased compared to the WT, correlating with an accumulation of virus envelope proteins on the cell surface. Increasing tetherin expression with type I interferon had only minor effects on cell-to-cell transmission. Furthermore, small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated depletion of tetherin decreased VS formation and cell-to-cell transmission of both Vpu-defective and WT HIV-1. Taken together, these data demonstrate that tetherin does not restrict VS-mediated T cell-to-T cell transfer of Vpu-defective HIV-1 and suggest that under some circumstances tetherin might promote cell-to-cell transfer, either by mediating the accumulation of virions on the cell surface or by regulating integrity of the VS. If so, inhibition of tetherin activity by Vpu may balance requirements for efficient cell-free virion production and cell-to-cell transfer of HIV-1 in the face of antiviral immune responses.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 can disseminate between and within hosts by cell-free infection or by direct cell-cell spread. Cell-cell spread of HIV-1 between CD4⁺ T cells is an efficient means of viral dissemination (65) and has been estimated to be several orders of magnitude more rapid than cell-free virus infection (6, 8, 41, 64, 74). Cell-cell transmission of HIV-1 takes place at the virological synapse (VS), a multimolecular structure that forms at the interface between an HIV-1-infected T cell and an uninfected target T cell during intercellular contact (27). Related structures that facilitate cell-cell spread of HIV-1 between dendritic cells and T cells (42) and between macrophages and T cells (16, 17) and for cell-cell spread of the related retrovirus human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1) (24) have also been described. Moreover, more long-range cell-cell transfer can occur via cellular projections, including filopodia (71) and membrane nanotubes (75). The VS is initiated by binding of the HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein (Env), which is expressed on the surfaces of infected T cells, to HIV-1 entry receptors (CD4 and either CXCR4 or CCR5) present on the target cell membrane (6, 22, 27, 41, 61, 73). Interactions between LFA-1 and ICAM-1 and ICAM-3 further stabilize the conjugate interface and, together with Env receptor binding, help trigger the recruitment of viral proteins, CD4/coreceptor, and integrins to the contact site (27, 28, 61). The enrichment of viral and cellular proteins at the VS is an active process, dependent on cytoskeletal remodeling, and in the infected T cell both the actin and tubulin network regulate polarization of HIV-1 proteins at the cell-cell interface, thus directing HIV-1 assembly and egress toward the engaged target cell (27, 29). Virus is transferred by budding into the synaptic cleft, and virions subsequently attach to the target cell membrane to mediate entry, either by fusion at the plasma membrane or possibly following endocytic uptake (2, 22). In this way, the VS promotes more rapid infection kinetics and may enhance HIV-1 pathogenesis in vivo.Cells have evolved a number of barriers to resist invading microorganisms. One mechanism that appears to be particularly important in counteracting HIV-1 infection is a group of interferon-inducible, innate restriction factors that includes TRIM5α, APOBEC3G, and tetherin (38, 49, 69, 79). Tetherin (BST-2/CD317) is a host protein expressed by many cell types, including CD4⁺ T cells, that acts at a late stage of the HIV-1 life cycle to trap (or “tether”) mature virions at the plasma membranes of virus-producing cells, thereby inhibiting cell-free virus release (49, 56, 81). This antiviral activity of tetherin is not restricted to HIV-1, and tetherin can also inhibit the release of other enveloped viruses from infected cells (31, 40, 54, 62). What the cellular function of tetherin is besides its antiviral activity is unclear, but because expression is upregulated following alpha/beta interferon (IFN-α/β) treatment (1) and tetherin can restrict a range of enveloped viruses, tetherin has been postulated to be a broad-acting mediator of the innate immune defense against enveloped viruses.To circumvent restriction of particle release, HIV-1 encodes the 16-kDa accessory protein Vpu, which antagonizes tetherin and restores normal virus budding (47, 78). The molecular mechanisms by which Vpu does this are not entirely clear, but evidence suggests that Vpu may exert its antagonistic function by downregulating tetherin from the cell surface, trapping it in the trans-Golgi network (10) and targeting it for degradation by the proteasome (12, 39, 81) or lysosome (9, 25, 44); however, degradation of tetherin may be dispensable for Vpu activity (13), and in HIV-1-infected T cells, surface downregulation of tetherin has been reported to be minor (45), suggesting that global removal of tetherin from the plasma membrane may not be necessary to antagonize its function.Tetherin-mediated restriction of HIV-1 and antagonism by Vpu have been the focus of much research, and inhibition of cell-free virus infection has been well documented (33, 47-49, 77, 81, 82). In contrast, less studied is the impact of tetherin on direct cell-cell dissemination. For example, it is not clear if tetherin-mediated restriction inhibits T cell-T cell spread as efficiently as cell-free release or whether tetherin affects VS formation. To address these questions, we analyzed Vpu⁺ and Vpu⁻ viruses for their ability to spread directly between Jurkat T cells and primary CD4⁺ T cells in the presence or absence of endogenous tetherin. Our data suggest that tetherin does not restrict HIV-1 in the context of cell-to-cell transmission of virus between T cells expressing endogenous tetherin. Interestingly, we also that observed that Vpu-defective virus may disseminate more efficiently by cell-cell spread at the VS. We postulate that cell-cell spread may favor viral pathogenesis by allowing HIV-1 to disseminate in the presence of tetherin during an interferon-producing innate response.     

Pseudotyping Incompatibility between HIV-1 and Gibbon Ape Leukemia Virus Env Is Modulated by Vpu

The Env protein from gibbon ape leukemia virus (GaLV) has been shown to be incompatible with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) in the production of infectious pseudotyped particles. This incompatibility has been mapped to the C-terminal cytoplasmic tail of GaLV Env. Surprisingly, we found that the HIV-1 accessory protein Vpu modulates this incompatibility. The infectivity of HIV-1 pseudotyped with murine leukemia virus (MLV) Env was not affected by Vpu. However, the infectivity of HIV-1 pseudotyped with an MLV Env with the cytoplasmic tail from GaLV Env (MLV/GaLV Env) was restricted 50- to 100-fold by Vpu. A Vpu mutant containing a scrambled membrane-spanning domain, Vpu_RD, was still able to restrict MLV/GaLV Env, but mutation of the serine residues at positions 52 and 56 completely alleviated the restriction. Loss of infectivity appeared to be caused by reduced MLV/GaLV Env incorporation into viral particles. The mechanism of this downmodulation appears to be distinct from Vpu-mediated CD4 downmodulation because Vpu-expressing cells that failed to produce infectious HIV-1 particles nonetheless continued to display robust surface MLV/GaLV Env expression. In addition, if MLV and HIV-1 were simultaneously introduced into the same cells, only the HIV-1 particle infectivity was restricted by Vpu. Collectively, these data suggest that Vpu modulates the cellular distribution of MLV/GaLV Env, preventing its recruitment to HIV-1 budding sites.The gammaretrovirus gibbon ape leukemia virus (GaLV) has been widely used for gene therapy because of its wide host cell tropism and nonpathogenicity (1, 6, 10, 12, 13, 20). The host cell receptor for GaLV Env has been cloned and identified as a sodium-dependent phosphate transporter protein (25, 26). Like other retroviruses, GaLV encodes a single transmembrane surface glycoprotein (GaLV Env), which is cleaved into surface (SU) and transmembrane (TM) subunits (Fig. ​(Fig.1).1). The TM domain of GaLV Env contains a short 30-amino-acid C-terminal cytoplasmic tail. Although GaLV Env functions well when coupled (pseudotyped) with murine leukemia virus (MLV)-based retroviral vectors, it has been shown to be completely incompatible with HIV-1 (4, 35). When GaLV Env is expressed with HIV-1, essentially no infectious HIV-1 particles are produced (4, 35). The mechanism for this infectivity downmodulation is unknown, but the component of GaLV Env responsible for the restriction has been mapped to the cytoplasmic tail. Replacing the cytoplasmic tail of GaLV Env with the equivalent sequence from MLV Env ameliorates the restriction. Likewise, replacing the cytoplasmic tail of MLV Env with that from GaLV Env confers the restriction (4).Open in a separate windowFIG. 1.Schematic of MLV Env protein. Sequences are the C-terminal cytoplasmic tails of MLV Env, GaLV Env, and human CD4. GaLV sequences in boldface are residues that have been shown to modulate the HIV-1 incompatibility (4). Underlined sequences in CD4 are amino acids required for Vpu-mediated downmodulation (2, 15). Arrows denote the location of MLV/GaLV tail substitution. SU, surface domain; TM, transmembrane domain.Vpu is an 81-amino-acid HIV-1 accessory protein produced from the same mRNA as the HIV-1 Env gene. The N terminus of Vpu contains a membrane-spanning domain, followed by a 50-amino-acid cytoplasmic domain. Vpu is unique to HIV-1 and a few closely related SIV strains. The best-characterized roles for Vpu in the HIV-1 life cycle are modulation of host proteins CD4 and tetherin (also known as BST-2, CD317, and HM1.24) (24, 38, 39). Vpu promotes the degradation of CD4 in the endoplasmic reticulum through a proteasome-dependent mechanism (29). The cytoplasmic tail of Vpu physically interacts with the cytoplasmic tail of CD4 and recruits the human β-transducing repeat-containing protein (β-TrCP) and E3 ubiquitin ligase components to polyubiquitinate and ultimately trigger the degradation of CD4 (18). Two serine residues at positions 52 and 56 of Vpu are phosphorylated by casein kinase-2 and are required for CD4 degradation (31, 32). The membrane-spanning domain of Vpu is not specifically required for CD4 degradation. A mutant protein containing a scrambled membrane-spanning sequence, Vpu_RD, is still able to trigger the degradation of CD4 (32). The region of CD4 that is targeted by Vpu is approximately 17 to 13 amino acids from the C terminus in the cytoplasmic tail (Fig. ​(Fig.1)1) (2, 15).In addition to degrading CD4, Vpu has also long been known to result in enhanced viral release (EVR) in certain cell lines (14, 36). Recently, the type I interferon-induced host protein tetherin was identified as being responsible for this Vpu-modulated restriction (24, 38). In the absence of Vpu, tetherin causes particles to remain tethered (hence the name) to the host cell postfission. Although Vpu counteracts the function of tetherin, the exact mechanism has not been fully elucidated. However, the mechanism for tetherin antagonism appears to be distinct from that for modulating CD4. Mutation of the serines 52 and 56 of Vpu abolish CD4 degradation, but only reduce EVR activity (5, 17, 21, 32). Some EVR activity remains even when much of the Vpu cytoplasmic tail is deleted (30). In addition, many mutations in the membrane-spanning domain, such as Vpu_RD, do not affect CD4 degradation and yet completely abolish EVR activity (27, 30, 37). The critical residues in tetherin for recognition by Vpu appear to be in the membrane-spanning domain and not the cytoplasmic tail (9, 19, 28). Although β-TrCP is required for complete EVR activity, there is no consensus whether the degradation of tetherin is proteasome or lysosome mediated (5, 7, 21) or whether degradation is required at all. In some cases there can be some EVR activity in the absence of tetherin degradation (17, 22).We demonstrate here that Vpu is responsible for the incompatibility between HIV-1 and GaLV Env. Glycoproteins containing the cytoplasmic tail from GaLV Env are prevented from being incorporated into HIV-1 particles by Vpu, effectively reducing infectious particle production by 50- to 100-fold. The serines at positions 52 and 56 are required for this restriction, but the membrane-spanning domain is not. Although the mechanism for this restriction appears similar to CD4 degradation, there are apparent differences. Vpu does not prevent surface expression, and it does not prevent its incorporation into MLV particles. Therefore, the mechanism of restriction appears to involve a system that does not rely directly on global protein degradation.     

Ebola Virus Glycoprotein Counteracts BST-2/Tetherin Restriction in a Sequence-Independent Manner That Does Not Require Tetherin Surface Removal

BST-2/tetherin is an interferon-inducible protein that restricts the release of enveloped viruses from the surface of infected cells by physically linking viral and cellular membranes. It is present at both the cell surface and in a perinuclear region, and viral anti-tetherin factors including HIV-1 Vpu and HIV-2 Env have been shown to decrease the cell surface population. To map the domains of human tetherin necessary for both virus restriction and sensitivity to viral anti-tetherin factors, we constructed a series of tetherin derivatives and assayed their activity. We found that the cytoplasmic tail (CT) and transmembrane (TM) domains of tetherin alone produced its characteristic cellular distribution, while the ectodomain of the protein, which includes a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchor, was sufficient to restrict virus release when presented by the CT/TM regions of a different type II membrane protein. To counteract tetherin restriction and remove it from the cell surface, HIV-1 Vpu required the specific sequence present in the TM domain of human tetherin. In contrast, the HIV-2 Env required only the ectodomain of the protein and was sensitive to a point mutation in this region. Strikingly, the anti-tetherin factor, Ebola virus GP, was able to overcome restriction conferred by both tetherin and a series of functional tetherin derivatives, including a wholly artificial tetherin molecule. Moreover, GP overcame restriction without significantly removing tetherin from the cell surface. These findings suggest that Ebola virus GP uses a novel mechanism to circumvent tetherin restriction.Pathogenic viruses often have evolved mechanisms to neutralize host defenses that act at the cellular level to interfere with the virus life cycle. Such cellular restriction factors have been most extensively characterized for HIV-1 (38) and include the interferon-inducible membrane protein BST-2/HM1.24/CD317/tetherin (28, 40). If unchecked, tetherin blocks the release of newly formed HIV-1 particles from cells by physically tethering them at the cell surface (7, 28, 32, 40). In addition, tetherin has been shown to act against a broad range of enveloped viral particles, including retroviruses, filoviruses, arenaviruses, and herpesviruses (17, 18, 23, 35). In turn, certain viruses that are targeted by tetherin appear to have evolved counteracting activities, and anti-tetherin factors so far identified include HIV-1 Vpu; HIV-2 Env; simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) Nef, Vpu, and Env proteins; Ebola virus GP; and Kaposi''s sarcoma-associated herpesvirus (KSHV) K5 (11, 16, 18, 20, 23, 28, 36, 40, 44, 45).Tetherin is a homodimeric type II integral membrane protein containing an N-terminal cytoplasmic tail (CT), a single-pass transmembrane domain (TM), an ectodomain-containing predicted coiled-coil regions, two glycoslyation sites, three conserved cysteines, and a C-terminal glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchor (2, 19, 31). This unusual topology, with two independent membrane anchors, has led to the suggestion that the retention of virions at the cell surface arises from tetherin''s ability to be inserted simultaneously in both host and viral membranes (28, 32, 41) or, alternatively, that dimers or higher-order complexes of tetherin conferred by the ectodomain mediate this effect (39). Interestingly, an artificial tetherin containing the same structural features as the native protein but constructed from unrelated sequences was able to restrict both HIV-1 and Ebola virus particles (32). This suggests that the viral lipid envelope is the target of tetherin and provides an explanation for tetherin''s broad activity against diverse enveloped viruses.A fraction of tetherin is present at the plasma membrane of cells (9, 14), and it has been proposed that viral anti-tetherin factors function by removing this cell surface fraction (40). This now has been shown to occur in the presence of HIV-1 Vpu (5, 7, 15, 26, 34, 40, 44), HIV-2 Env (5, 20), SIV Env (11), SIV Nef (15), and KSHV K5 (3, 23). In addition, certain anti-tetherin factors also may promote the degradation of tetherin, as has been observed for both HIV-1 Vpu (3, 5, 7, 10, 22, 26, 27) and KSHV K5 (3, 23), although Vpu also appears able to block tetherin restriction in the absence of degradation (8), and no effects on tetherin steady-state levels have been observed in the presence of either the HIV-2 or SIVtan Env (11, 20). Simply keeping tetherin away from the cell surface, or targeting it for degradation, may not be the only mechanism used by anti-tetherin factors, since it also has been reported that Vpu does not affect the levels of surface tetherin or its total cellular levels in certain T-cell lines (27).The interactions between tetherin and viral anti-tetherin factors show evidence of species specificity, suggesting ongoing evolution between viruses and their hosts. HIV-1 Vpu is active against human and chimpanzee tetherin but not other primate tetherins (10, 25, 34, 36, 44, 45), while SIV Nef proteins are active against primate but not human tetherins (16, 36, 44, 45). This suggests that, unlike tetherin restriction, the action of the anti-tetherin factors may involve specific sequence interactions. Indeed, the TM domain has been recognized as a target for HIV-1 Vpu (10, 15, 16, 25, 34), while a single point mutation introduced into the extracellular domain of human tetherin can block its antagonism by the SIVtan Env (11).In the present study, we investigated the roles of the different domains of tetherin in both promoting virus restriction and conferring susceptibility to the anti-tetherin factors encoded by HIV-1, HIV-2, and Ebola virus. We confirmed that tetherin restriction can be conferred by proteins that retain the two distinct membrane anchors, while signals for the cellular localization of the protein reside in the CT/TM domains of the protein. We found that the Vpu protein targets the TM domain of tetherin, while the HIV-2 Env targets the ectodomain of the protein. In contrast, the Ebola virus GP appears to use a non-sequence-specific mechanism to counteract tetherin restriction, since even an artificial tetherin could be successfully overcome by GP expression. Interestingly, Ebola virus GP counteracted tetherin restriction without removing the protein from the cell surface, suggesting that it is possible to overcome this restriction by mechanisms other than blocking tetherin''s cell surface expression.     

The Transmembrane Domain of BST-2 Determines Its Sensitivity to Down-Modulation by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Vpu

Bone marrow stromal cell antigen 2 (BST-2, also known as tetherin) restricts the production of a number of enveloped viruses by blocking virus release from the cell surface. This antiviral activity is counteracted by such viral factors as Vpu of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). Here, we report that Vpu antagonizes human BST-2 but not BST-2 derived from African green monkeys. The determinants of susceptibility to Vpu map to the transmembrane domain of BST-2. In accordance with this, expression of human BST-2 containing a modified transmembrane domain effectively blocks the replication of wild-type Vpu-expressing HIV-1 in CD4⁺ T cells. Furthermore, these BST-2 variants, as opposed to wild-type human BST-2, are refractory to Vpu-mediated down-regulation as a result of an attenuated interaction with Vpu. In view of the work by others pointing to a key role of the transmembrane domain of Vpu in promoting virus release, our data suggest that a direct interaction through the transmembrane domain of each of these two proteins is a prerequisite for Vpu to down-modulate BST-2.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) encodes four accessory proteins, Vif, Vpr, Vpu, and Nef. Although they are dispensable for HIV-1 replication in certain transformed cell lines, these accessory proteins play important roles in HIV-1 pathogenesis by modulating host immunity and overcoming antagonism by cellular factors (10). For example, Vif counteracts APOBEC3G by recruiting the cullin 5-elongin B/C ubiquitin ligase complex and sending polyubiquitinated APOBEC3G to proteasomes for degradation (29). In the absence of Vif, newly synthesized APOBEC3G is incorporated into virus particles and hampers the production of infectious proviral DNA in the new round of infection (4, 10, 23). In addition to its role in down-modulating the cell surface expression of CD4 in infected T cells (11), Vpu stimulates HIV-1 production in cells such as HeLa cells (26). The mechanism behind this latter activity of Vpu was unknown until it was recently discovered that bone marrow stromal cell antigen 2 (BST-2, also known as tetherin, CD317, or HM1.24) blocks the release of HIV-1 and that this inhibitory effect is antagonized by viral Vpu (16, 25).BST-2 harbors an N-terminal transmembrane domain and a C-terminal glycosyl-phosphatidylinositol anchor that together create an unusual topology with both termini of BST-2 inserted into the plasma membrane (8, 18). This unique topology of BST-2 may underlie the mechanism for the retention of progeny virus particles at the cell surface (16). An indirect mechanism behind this tethering effect has not been ruled out, especially in view of the difficulty of detecting BST-2 protein in purified HIV-1 particles (14). In addition to HIV-1, a number of enveloped viruses are subject to inhibition by BST-2, including simian immunodeficiency virus, feline immunodeficiency virus, equine infectious anemia virus, Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, and Lassa virus, as well as Ebola and Marburg viruses (5, 6, 16, 19, 25). This suggests that BST-2 has a broad antiviral effect spectrum.The bst-2 gene has in its promoter the IRF-1/2 and ISGF3 response elements and thus belongs to the interferon-stimulated gene family (17). In line with its ability to impair the release of enveloped viruses, BST-2 has been demonstrated to be the effector in human embryonic kidney (HEK293T) cells that leads to the interferon-induced block of Vpu deletion-containing HIV-1 production (15). However, the African green monkey kidney cell line COS-7 responds to interferon treatment with a different outcome in that the production of both Vpu deletion-containing and Vpu-expressing HIV-1 is inhibited (15). This indicates that interferon induces a block to HIV-1 in COS-7 cells that cannot be overcome by Vpu. A conceivable candidate that creates this block is BST-2 in COS-7 cells (hereafter named agmBST-2). In this study, we provide evidence that depletion of endogenous BST-2 in COS-7 cells greatly alleviates interferon-induced inhibition of HIV-1 production. The refractoriness of agmBST-2 to Vpu results from a weak association of these two proteins and a resistance of agmBST-2 to Vpu-mediated down-regulation.     

The ESCRT-Associated Protein Alix Recruits the Ubiquitin Ligase Nedd4-1 To Facilitate HIV-1 Release through the LYPXnL L Domain Motif

The p6 region of HIV-1 Gag contains two late (L) domains, PTAP and LYPX_nL, that bind Tsg101 and Alix, respectively. Interactions with these two cellular proteins recruit members of the host''s fission machinery (ESCRT) to facilitate HIV-1 release. Other retroviruses gain access to the host ESCRT components by utilizing a PPXY-type L domain that interacts with cellular Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligases. Despite the absence of a PPXY motif in HIV-1 Gag, interaction with the ubiquitin ligase Nedd4-2 was recently shown to stimulate HIV-1 release. We show here that another Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligase, Nedd4-1, corrected release defects resulting from the disruption of PTAP (PTAP⁻), suggesting that HIV-1 Gag also recruits Nedd4-1 to facilitate virus release. Notably, Nedd4-1 remediation of HIV-1 PTAP⁻ budding defects is independent of cellular Tsg101, implying that Nedd4-1''s function in HIV-1 release does not involve ESCRT-I components and is therefore distinct from that of Nedd4-2. Consistent with this finding, deletion of the p6 region decreased Nedd4-1-Gag interaction, and disruption of the LYPX_nL motif eliminated Nedd4-1-mediated restoration of HIV-1 PTAP⁻. This result indicated that both Nedd4-1 interaction with Gag and function in virus release occur through the Alix-binding LYPX_nL motif. Mutations of basic residues located in the NC domain of Gag that are critical for Alix''s facilitation of HIV-1 release, also disrupted release mediated by Nedd4-1, further confirming a Nedd4-1-Alix functional interdependence. In fact we found that Nedd4-1 binds Alix in both immunoprecipitation and yeast-two-hybrid assays. In addition, Nedd4-1 requires its catalytic activity to promote virus release. Remarkably, RNAi knockdown of cellular Nedd4-1 eliminated Alix ubiquitination in the cell and impeded its ability to function in HIV-1 release. Together our data support a model in which Alix recruits Nedd4-1 to facilitate HIV-1 release mediated through the LYPX_nL/Alix budding pathway via a mechanism that involves Alix ubiquitination.Retroviral Gag polyproteins bear short conserved sequences that control virus budding and release. As such, these motifs have been dubbed late or L domains (49). Three types of L domains have thus far been characterized: PT/SAP, LYPX_nL, and PPPY motifs (5, 9, 32). They recruit host proteins known to function in the vacuolar protein sorting (vps) of cargo proteins and the generation of multivesicular bodies (MVB) compartments (2). It is currently accepted that budding of vesicles into MVB involves the sequential recruitment of endosomal sorting complexes required for transport (ESCRT-I, -II, and -III) and the activity of the VPS4 AAA-ATPase (22). These sorting events are believed to be triggered by recognition of ubiquitin molecules conjugated to cargo proteins (20, 24, 41). For retrovirus budding, L domain motifs are the primary signals in Gag that elicit the recruitment of ESCRT components to facilitate viral budding. Consequently, mutations in L domain motifs or dominant-negative interference with the function of ESCRT-III members or the VPS4 ATPase adversely affect virus release. This indicates that Gag interactions with the ESCRT machinery are necessary for virus budding and separation from the cell (7, 10, 15, 16, 21, 28, 44).Two late domains have been identified within the p6 region of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) Gag protein: the PTAP and LYPX_nL motifs. The PTAP motif binds the cellular protein Tsg101 (15, 39, 40, 47), whereas the LYPX_nL motif is the docking site for Alix (44). Tsg101 functions in HIV-1 budding (15) as a member of ESCRT-I (30, 48), a soluble complex required for the generation of MVB. This process is topologically similar to HIV-1 budding and requires the recruitment of ESCRT-III members called the charged-multivesicular body proteins (3, 29, 48) and the activity of the VPS4 AAA-ATPase (4, 48). In addition to binding the LYPX_nL motif, Alix also interacts with the nucleocapsid (NC) domain of HIV-1 Gag (13, 38), thus linking Gag to components of ESCRT-III that are critical for virus release (13).Other retroviruses, including the human T-cell leukemia virus (HTLV) and the Moloney murine leukemia virus (MoMLV), utilize the PPPY-type L domain to efficiently release virus (7, 26, 51). The PPPY motif binds members of the Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligase family (6, 7, 16, 19, 25, 43), whose normal cellular function is to ubiquitinate cargo proteins and target them into the MVB sorting pathway (11, 12, 20). Members of the Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligase family include Nedd4-1, Nedd4-2 (also known as Nedd4L), WWP-1/2, and Itch. They contain three distinct domains: an N-terminal membrane binding C2 domain (12), a central PPPY-interacting WW domain (43), and a C-terminal HECT domain that contains the ubiquitin ligase active site (42). The functional requirement for the binding of Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligases to the PPPY motif in virus budding has been demonstrated (7, 16, 18, 19, 25, 26, 28, 50, 51). Overexpression of dominant-negative mutants of Nedd4-like ligases, ESCRT-III components, or VPS4 cause a potent inhibition of PPPY-dependent virus release (7, 19, 29, 31, 52) and induce assembly and budding defects similar to those observed after perturbation of the PPPY motif (26, 51). These observations demonstrated that Nedd4-like ligases connect Gag encoding PPPY motif to ESCRT-III and VPS4 proteins to facilitate virus release.Whereas the role of Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligases in virus budding has been established, the protein interactions that link them to the cell''s ESCRT-III pathway are still unknown. Evidence for associations of Nedd4-like ligases with ESCRT proteins have been previously reported and include: the binding of Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligases LD1 and Nedd4-1 to ESCRT-I member Tsg101 (6, 31), the colocalization of multiple Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligases with endosomal compartments (1, 28), the requirement of the cell''s ESCRT pathway for Itch mediated L domain independent stimulation of MoMLV release (23), and the ubiquitination of ESCRT-I components with a shorter isoform, Nedd4-2s (8). Therefore, Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligase interactions with members of the cell''s ESCRT pathway may provide retroviral Gag with access to the host budding machinery required for virus release.Although HIV-1 Gag does not carry the PPPY canonical sequence known to interact with Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligases, both Nedd4-1 and Nedd4-2 were shown to restore the release of the HIV-1 PTAP⁻ mutant, albeit Nedd4-1 with less efficiency than Nedd4-2 (8, 46). These findings suggested that HIV-1 might utilize cellular Nedd4-like ubiquitin ligases to increase virus release. We present here evidence demonstrating that Nedd4-1 interacts with Gag and enhances HIV-1 PTAP⁻ virus release. Furthermore, we show that Nedd4-1''s function in HIV-1 release is distinct from that of Nedd4-2 in both its viral and cellular requirements. Notably, we found that Nedd4-1 enhancement of HIV-1 release requires the Alix-binding LYPX_nL L domain motif in the p6 region and basic residues in the NC domain. In addition, Alix''s facilitation of HIV-1 release requires cellular Nedd4-1, since mutations in NC that prevented Alix-mediated HIV-1 release also eliminated release by overexpression of Nedd4-1. This suggested a Nedd4-1-Alix physical and functional interdependence. In agreement with this, we found Nedd4-1 to bind and ubiquitinate Alix in the cell. Taken together, these results support a model in which Alix recruits Nedd4-1 to facilitate late steps of HIV-1 release through the LYPX_nL L domain motif via a mechanism that involves Alix ubiquitination.     

Compartmentalization and Clonal Amplification of HIV-1 Variants in the Cerebrospinal Fluid during Primary Infection

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-associated dementia (HAD) is a severe neurological disease that affects a subset of HIV-1-infected individuals. Increased compartmentalization has been reported between blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) HIV-1 populations in subjects with HAD, but it is still not known when compartmentalization arises during the course of infection. To assess HIV-1 genetic compartmentalization early during infection, we compared HIV-1 populations in the peripheral blood and CSF in 11 primary infection subjects, with analysis of longitudinal samples over the first 18 months for a subset of subjects. We used heteroduplex tracking assays targeting the variable regions of env and single-genome amplification and sequence analysis of the full-length env gene to identify CSF-compartmentalized variants and to examine viral genotypes within the compartmentalized populations. For most subjects, HIV-1 populations were equilibrated between the blood and CSF compartments. However, compartmentalized HIV-1 populations were detected in the CSF of three primary infection subjects, and longitudinal analysis of one subject revealed that compartmentalization during primary HIV-1 infection was resolved. Clonal amplification of specific HIV-1 variants was identified in the CSF population of one primary infection subject. Our data show that compartmentalization can occur in the central nervous system (CNS) of subjects in primary HIV-1 infection in part through persistence of the putative transmitted parental variant or via viral genetic adaptation to the CNS environment. The presence of distinct HIV-1 populations in the CSF indicates that independent HIV-1 replication can occur in the CNS, even early after HIV-1 transmission.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection of the central nervous system (CNS) can lead to neurological disease in a subset of HIV-infected individuals and may include the development of HIV-1-associated dementia (HAD) (2, 18). HAD is characterized by severe neurological dysfunction, and affected individuals generally have impaired cognitive and motor functions. HIV-1 enters the CNS during primary infection, most likely via the migration of infected monocytes and lymphocytes across the blood-brain barrier (33, 37, 42). The main cell types in the CNS that HIV-1 can productively infect are the perivascular macrophages and microglial cells, which express low receptor densities of CD4, CCR5, and CXCR4 (7, 18, 60, 63). Previous studies have also reported that neurotropic HIV-1 variants are generally macrophage tropic (19, 20, 32, 45, 52, 61). Although cells in the CNS may be infected with HIV-1 during the course of disease, it is still unclear whether productive HIV-1 replication occurs in the CNS early during infection.Genetically compartmentalized HIV-1 variants have been detected in the brains of HAD subjects at autopsy (13, 14, 43, 48, 52) and in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of HAD subjects sampled over the course of infection (26, 46, 51, 59). Extensive compartmentalization between the periphery and the CNS has been reported in subjects with HAD; however, it is not yet known when compartmentalization occurs during the course of HIV-1 infection. Primary HIV-1 infection refers to the acute and early phases of infection, during which peak plasma viremia often occurs and a viral “set point” may be reached (8, 34), within the first year after HIV exposure (64). Studies examining compartmentalization between the blood plasma and CSF during primary infection have been limited, and extensive compartmentalization has not been detected in primary infection subjects (26, 50).In this study, we examined HIV-1 genetic compartmentalization between the peripheral blood and CSF during primary HIV-1 infection. Cross-sectional and longitudinal blood plasma and CSF samples were analyzed for viral compartmentalization using the heteroduplex tracking assay (HTA) and single genome amplification (SGA). We used the HTA to differentiate between HIV-1 variants in the CSF that were either compartmentalized to the CSF or equilibrated with the peripheral blood. Previous studies have used the HTA to separate HIV-1 genetic variants in different anatomical compartments (10, 24, 27, 51) and to follow HIV-1 evolutionary variants over the course of infection (9, 25, 31, 41, 49, 50). We also conducted SGA on a subset of subjects to further examine viral genetic compartmentalization during primary infection. Here we report the detection of compartmentalized and clonally amplified HIV-1 variants in the CSF of subjects in the primary stage of HIV-1 infection. Our results suggest that minor to extensive HIV-1 genetic compartmentalization can occur between the periphery and the CNS during primary HIV-1 infection and that viral compartmentalization, as measured in the CSF, is transient in some subjects.     

Preinfection Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-Specific Cytotoxic T Lymphocytes Failed To Prevent HIV Type 1 Infection from Strains Genetically Unrelated to Viruses in Long-Term Exposed Partners

Understanding the mechanisms underlying potential altered susceptibility to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection in highly exposed seronegative (ES) individuals and the later clinical consequences of breakthrough infection can provide insight into strategies to control HIV-1 with an effective vaccine. From our Seattle ES cohort, we identified one individual (LSC63) who seroconverted after over 2 years of repeated unprotected sexual contact with his HIV-1-infected partner (P63) and other sexual partners of unknown HIV-1 serostatus. The HIV-1 variants infecting LSC63 were genetically unrelated to those sequenced from P63. This may not be surprising, since viral load measurements in P63 were repeatedly below 50 copies/ml, making him an unlikely transmitter. However, broad HIV-1-specific cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL) responses were detected in LSC63 before seroconversion. Compared to those detected after seroconversion, these responses were of lower magnitude and half of them targeted different regions of the viral proteome. Strong HLA-B27-restricted CTLs, which have been associated with disease control, were detected in LSC63 after but not before seroconversion. Furthermore, for the majority of the protein-coding regions of the HIV-1 variants in LSC63 (except gp41, nef, and the 3′ half of pol), the genetic distances between the infecting viruses and the viruses to which he was exposed through P63 (termed the exposed virus) were comparable to the distances between random subtype B HIV-1 sequences and the exposed viruses. These results suggest that broad preinfection immune responses were not able to prevent the acquisition of HIV-1 infection in LSC63, even though the infecting viruses were not particularly distant from the viruses that may have elicited these responses.Understanding the mechanisms of altered susceptibility or control of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection in highly exposed seronegative (ES) persons may provide invaluable information aiding the design of HIV-1 vaccines and therapy (9, 14, 15, 33, 45, 57, 58). In a cohort of female commercial sex workers in Nairobi, Kenya, a small proportion of individuals remained seronegative for over 3 years despite the continued practice of unprotected sex (12, 28, 55, 56). Similarly, resistance to HIV-1 infection has been reported in homosexual men who frequently practiced unprotected sex with infected partners (1, 15, 17, 21, 61). Multiple factors have been associated with the resistance to HIV-1 infection in ES individuals (32), including host genetic factors (8, 16, 20, 37-39, 44, 46, 47, 49, 59, 63), such as certain HLA class I and II alleles (41), as well as cellular (1, 15, 26, 55, 56), humoral (25, 29), and innate immune responses (22, 35).Seroconversion in previously HIV-resistant Nairobi female commercial sex workers, despite preexisting HIV-specific cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL) responses, has been reported (27). Similarly, 13 of 125 ES enrollees in our Seattle ES cohort (1, 15, 17) have become late seroconverters (H. Zhu, T. Andrus, Y. Liu, and T. Zhu, unpublished observations). Here, we analyze the virology, genetics, and immune responses of HIV-1 infection in one of the later seroconverting subjects, LSC63, who had developed broad CTL responses before seroconversion.     

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.     

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.     

Analysis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Viremia and Provirus in Resting CD4+ T Cells Reveals a Novel Source of Residual Viremia in Patients on Antiretroviral Therapy

Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) can reduce human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) viremia to clinically undetectable levels. Despite this dramatic reduction, some virus is present in the blood. In addition, a long-lived latent reservoir for HIV-1 exists in resting memory CD4⁺ T cells. This reservoir is believed to be a source of the residual viremia and is the focus of eradication efforts. Here, we use two measures of population structure—analysis of molecular variance and the Slatkin-Maddison test—to demonstrate that the residual viremia is genetically distinct from proviruses in resting CD4⁺ T cells but that proviruses in resting and activated CD4⁺ T cells belong to a single population. Residual viremia is genetically distinct from proviruses in activated CD4⁺ T cells, monocytes, and unfractionated peripheral blood mononuclear cells. The finding that some of the residual viremia in patients on HAART stems from an unidentified cellular source other than CD4⁺ T cells has implications for eradication efforts.Successful treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection with highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) reduces free virus in the blood to levels undetectable by the most sensitive clinical assays (18, 36). However, HIV-1 persists as a latent provirus in resting, memory CD4⁺ T lymphocytes (6, 9, 12, 16, 48) and perhaps in other cell types (45, 52). The latent reservoir in resting CD4⁺ T cells represents a barrier to eradication because of its long half-life (15, 37, 40-42) and because specifically targeting and purging this reservoir is inherently difficult (8, 25, 27).In addition to the latent reservoir in resting CD4⁺ T cells, patients on HAART also have a low amount of free virus in the plasma, typically at levels below the limit of detection of current clinical assays (13, 19, 35, 37). Because free virus has a short half-life (20, 47), residual viremia is indicative of active virus production. The continued presence of free virus in the plasma of patients on HAART indicates either ongoing replication (10, 13, 17, 19), release of virus after reactivation of latently infected CD4⁺ T cells (22, 24, 31, 50), release from other cellular reservoirs (7, 45, 52), or some combination of these mechanisms. Finding the cellular source of residual viremia is important because it will identify the cells that are still capable of producing virus in patients on HAART, cells that must be targeted in any eradication effort.Detailed analysis of this residual viremia has been hindered by technical challenges involved in working with very low concentrations of virus (13, 19, 35). Recently, new insights into the nature of residual viremia have been obtained through intensive patient sampling and enhanced ultrasensitive sequencing methods (1). In a subset of patients, most of the residual viremia consisted of a small number of viral clones (1, 46) produced by a cell type severely underrepresented in the peripheral circulation (1). These unique viral clones, termed predominant plasma clones (PPCs), persist unchanged for extended periods of time (1). The persistence of PPCs indicates that in some patients there may be another major cellular source of residual viremia (1). However, PPCs were observed in a small group of patients who started HAART with very low CD4 counts, and it has been unclear whether the PPC phenomenon extends beyond this group of patients. More importantly, it has been unclear whether the residual viremia generally consists of distinct virus populations produced by different cell types.Since the HIV-1 infection in most patients is initially established by a single viral clone (23, 51), with subsequent diversification (29), the presence of genetically distinct populations of virus in a single individual can reflect entry of viruses into compartments where replication occurs with limited subsequent intercompartmental mixing (32). Sophisticated genetic tests can detect such population structure in a sample of viral sequences (4, 39, 49). Using two complementary tests of population structure (14, 43), we analyzed viral sequences from multiple sources within individual patients in order to determine whether a source other than circulating resting CD4⁺ T cells contributes to residual viremia and viral persistence. Our results have important clinical implications for understanding HIV-1 persistence and treatment failure and for improving eradication strategies, which are currently focusing only on the latent CD4⁺ T-cell reservoir.     

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.     

Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Nucleocapsid p1 Confers ESCRT Pathway Dependence

To facilitate the release of infectious progeny virions, human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) exploits the Endosomal Sorting Complex Required for Transport (ESCRT) pathway by engaging Tsg101 and ALIX through late assembly (L) domains in the C-terminal p6 domain of Gag. However, the L domains in p6 are known to be dispensable for efficient particle production by certain HIV-1 Gag constructs that have the nucleocapsid (NC) domain replaced by a foreign dimerization domain to substitute for the assembly function of NC. We now show that one such L domain-independent HIV-1 Gag construct (termed Z_WT) that has NC-p1-p6 replaced by a leucine zipper domain is resistant to dominant-negative inhibitors of the ESCRT pathway that block HIV-1 particle production. However, Z_WT became dependent on the presence of an L domain when NC-p1-p6 was restored to its C terminus. Furthermore, when the NC domain was replaced by a leucine zipper, the p1-p6 region, but not p6 alone, conferred sensitivity to inhibition of the ESCRT pathway. In an authentic HIV-1 Gag context, the effect of an inhibitor of the ESCRT pathway on particle production could be alleviated by deleting a portion of the NC domain together with p1. Together, these results indicate that the ESCRT pathway dependence of HIV-1 budding is determined, at least in part, by the NC-p1 region of Gag.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and other retroviruses hijack the cellular Endosomal Sorting Complex Required for Transport (ESCRT) pathway to promote the detachment of virions from the cell surface and from each other (3, 21, 42, 44, 47). The ESCRT pathway was initially identified based on its requirement for the sorting of ubiquitinated cargo into multivesicular bodies (MVB) (50, 51). During MVB biogenesis, the ESCRT pathway drives the membrane deformation and fission events required for the inward vesiculation of the limiting membrane of this organelle (26, 29, 50, 51). More recently, it emerged that the ESCRT pathway is also essential for the normal abscission of daughter cells during the final stage of cell division (10, 43). Most of the components of the ESCRT pathway are involved in the formation of four heteromeric protein complexes termed ESCRT-0, ESCRT-I, ESCRT-II, and ESCRT-III. Additional components include ALIX, which interacts both with ESCRT-I and ESCRT-III, and the AAA ATPase Vps4, which mediates the disassembly of ESCRT-III (29, 42).The deformation and scission of endocytic membranes is thought to be mediated by ESCRT-III, which, together with Vps4, constitutes the most conserved element of the pathway (23, 26, 42). Indeed, it was recently shown that purified yeast ESCRT-III induces membrane deformation (52), and in another study three subunits of yeast ESCRT-III were sufficient to promote the formation of intralumenal vesicles in an in vitro assay (61). In mammals, ESCRT-III is formed by the charged MVB proteins (CHMPs), which are structurally related and tightly regulated through autoinhibition (2, 33, 46, 53, 62). The removal of an inhibitory C-terminal domain induces polymerization and association with endosomal membranes and converts CHMPs into potent inhibitors of retroviral budding (34, 46, 53, 60, 62). Alternatively, CHMPs can be converted into strong inhibitors of the ESCRT pathway and of HIV-1 budding through the addition of a bulky tag such as green fluorescent protein (GFP) or red fluorescent protein (RFP) (27, 36, 39, 54). Retroviral budding in general is also strongly inhibited by catalytically inactive Vps4 (22, 41, 55), or upon Vsp4B depletion (31), confirming the crucial role of ESCRT-III.Retroviruses engage the ESCRT pathway through the activity of so-called late assembly (L) domains in Gag. In the case of HIV-1, the primary L domain maps to a conserved PTAP motif in the C-terminal p6 domain of Gag (24, 28) and interacts with the ESCRT-I component Tsg101 (15, 22, 40, 58). HIV-1 p6 also harbors an auxiliary L domain of the LYPx_nL type, which interacts with the V domain of ALIX (20, 35, 39, 54, 59, 63). Interestingly, Tsg101 binding site mutants of HIV-1 can be fully rescued through the overexpression of ALIX, and this rescue depends on the ALIX binding site in p6 (20, 56). In contrast, the overexpression of a specific splice variant of the ubiquitin ligase Nedd4-2 has been shown to rescue the release and infectivity of HIV-1 mutants lacking all known L domains in p6 (12, 57). Nedd4 family ubiquitin ligases had previously been implicated in the function of PPxY-type L domains, which also depend on an intact ESCRT pathway for function (4, 32, 38). However, HIV-1 Gag lacks PPxY motifs, and the WW domains of Nedd4-2, which mediate its interaction with PPxY motifs, are dispensable for the rescue of HIV-1 L domain mutants (57).ALIX also interacts with the nucleocapsid (NC) region of HIV-1 Gag (18, 49), which is located upstream of p6 and the p1 spacer peptide. ALIX binds HIV-1 NC via its Bro1 domain, and the capacity to interact with NC and to stimulate the release of a minimal HIV-1 Gag construct is shared among widely divergent Bro1 domain proteins (48). Based on these findings and the observation that certain mutations in NC cause a phenotype that resembles that of L domain mutants, it has been proposed that NC cooperates with p6 to recruit the machinery required for normal HIV-1 budding (18, 49).NC also plays a role in Gag polyprotein multimerization, and this function of NC depends on its RNA-binding activity (5-8). It has been proposed that the role of the NC-nucleic acid interaction during assembly is to promote the formation of Gag dimers (37), and HIV-1 assembly in the absence of NC can indeed be efficiently rescued by leucine zipper dimerization domains (65). Surprisingly, in this setting the L domains in p6 also became dispensable, since particle production remained efficient even when the entire NC-p1-p6 region of HIV-1 Gag was replaced by a leucine zipper (1, 65). These findings raised the possibility that the reliance of wild-type (WT) HIV-1 Gag on a functional ESCRT pathway is, at least in part, specified by NC-p1-p6. However, it also remained possible that the chimeric Gag constructs engaged the ESCRT pathway in an alternative manner.In the present report, we provide evidence supporting the first of those two possibilities. Particle production became independent of ESCRT when the entire NC-p1-p6 region was replaced by a leucine zipper, and reversion to ESCRT dependence was shown to occur as a result of restoration of p1-p6 but not of p6 alone. Furthermore, although the deletion of p1 alone had little effect in an authentic HIV-1 Gag context, the additional removal of a portion of NC improved particle production in the presence of an inhibitor of the ESCRT pathway. Together, these data imply that the NC-p1 region plays an important role in the ESCRT-dependence of HIV-1 particle production.