CXCR4 as a Functional Coreceptor for Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection of Primary Macrophages

The coreceptors used by primary syncytium-inducing (SI) human immunodeficiency virus type 1 isolates for infection of primary macrophages were investigated. SI strains using only CXCR4 replicated equally well in macrophages with or without CCR5 and were inhibited by several different ligands for CXCR4 including SDF-1 and bicyclam derivative AMD3100. SI strains that used a broad range of coreceptors including CCR3, CCR5, CCR8, CXCR4, and BONZO infected CCR5-deficient macrophages about 10-fold less efficiently than CCR5⁺ macrophages. Moreover, AMD3100 blocked infection of CCR5-negative macrophages by these strains. Our results therefore demonstrate that CXCR4, as well as CCR5, is used for infection of primary macrophages but provide no evidence for the use of alternative coreceptors.     

Continued Utilization of CCR5 Coreceptor by a Newly Derived T-Cell Line-Adapted Isolate of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1

The differential use of CC chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) and CXC chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4) may be intimately involved in the transmission and progression of human immunodeficiency virus infection. Changes in coreceptor utilization have also been noted upon adaptation of primary isolates (PI) to growth in established T-cell lines. All of the T-cell line-adapted (TCLA) viruses studied to date utilize CXCR4 but not CCR5. This observation had been suggested as an explanation for the sensitivity of TCLA, but not PI, viruses to neutralization by recombinant gp120 antisera and V3-directed monoclonal antibodies, but recent studies have shown coreceptor utilization to be independent of neutralization sensitivity. Here we describe a newly isolated TCLA virus that is sensitive to neutralization but continues to utilize both CXCR4 and CCR5 for infection. This finding further divorces coreceptor specificity from neutralization sensitivity and from certain changes in cell tropism. That the TCLA virus can continue to utilize CCR5 despite the changes that occur upon adaptation and in the apparent absence of CCR5 expression in the FDA/H9 T-cell line suggests that the interaction between envelope protein and coreceptor may be mediated by multiple weak interactions along a diffuse surface.     

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

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

Microglia Express CCR5, CXCR4, and CCR3, but of These, CCR5 Is the Principal Coreceptor for Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Dementia Isolates

Microglia are the main human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) reservoir in the central nervous system and most likely play a major role in the development of HIV dementia (HIVD). To characterize human adult microglial chemokine receptors, we analyzed the expression and calcium signaling of CCR5, CCR3, and CXCR4 and their roles in HIV entry. Microglia expressed higher levels of CCR5 than of either CCR3 or CXCR4. Of these three chemokine receptors, only CCR5 and CXCR4 were able to transduce a signal in microglia in response to their respective ligands, MIP-1β and SDF-1α, as recorded by single-cell calcium flux experiments. We also found that CCR5 is the predominant coreceptor used for infection of human adult microglia by the HIV type 1 dementia isolates HIV-1_DS-br, HIV-1_RC-br, and HIV-1_YU-2, since the anti-CCR5 antibody 2D7 was able to dramatically inhibit microglial infection by both wild-type and single-round luciferase pseudotype reporter viruses. Anti-CCR3 (7B11) and anti-CXCR4 (12G5) antibodies had little or no effect on infection. Last, we found that virus pseudotyped with the DS-br and RC-br envelopes can infect cells transfected with CD4 in conjunction with the G-protein-coupled receptors APJ, CCR8, and GPR15, which have been previously implicated in HIV entry.     

Role of the β-Chemokine Receptors CCR3 and CCR5 in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection of Monocytes and Microglia

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection in mononuclear phagocyte lineage cells (monocytes, macrophages, and microglia) is a critical component in the pathogenesis of viral infection. Viral replication in macrophages serves as a reservoir, a site of dissemination, and an instigator for neurological sequelae during HIV-1 disease. Recent studies demonstrated that chemokine receptors are necessary coreceptors for HIV-1 entry which determine viral tropism for different cell types. To investigate the relative contribution of the β-chemokine receptors CCR3 and CCR5 to viral infection of mononuclear phagocytes we utilized a panel of macrophage-tropic HIV-1 strains (from blood and brain tissue) to infect highly purified populations of monocytes and microglia. Antibodies to CD4 (OKT4A) abrogated HIV-1 infection. The β chemokines and antibodies to CCR3 failed to affect viral infection of both macrophage cell types. Antibodies to CCR5 (3A9) prevented monocyte infection but only slowed HIV replication in microglia. Thus, CCR5, not CCR3, is an essential receptor for HIV-1 infection of monocytes. Microglia express both CCR5 and CCR3, but antibodies to them fail to inhibit viral entry, suggesting the presence of other chemokine receptors for infection of these cells. These studies demonstrate the importance of mononuclear phagocyte heterogeneity in establishing HIV-1 infection and persistence.     

CCR5 Expression Correlates with Susceptibility of Maturing Monocytes to Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection

The chemokine receptor CCR5 and to a lesser extent CCR3 and CCR2b have been shown to serve as coreceptors for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) entry into blood- or tissue-derived macrophages. Therefore, we examined the expression of the chemokine receptors CCR1, CCR2b, CCR3, CCR5, and CXCR4 as RNAs or as membrane-expressed antigens in monocytes maturing into macrophages and correlated these results with the susceptibility of macrophages to HIV-1 infection, as measured by their concentrations of extracellular p24 antigen and levels of intracellular HIV DNA by quantitative PCR. There was little change in levels of CCR1, CCR2b, and CCR5 RNAs. CCR3 RNA and surface antigen were undetectable throughout maturation of adherent monocytes over 10 days. CXCR4 RNA and membrane antigen were strongly expressed in newly adherent monocytes, but their levels declined at day 7. The amounts of CCR5 RNA remained stable, but the amounts of CCR5 antigen increased from undetectable to peak levels at day 7 and then declined slightly at day 10. Levels of susceptibility to laboratory (HIV-1_BaL) and clinical strains of HIV-1 showed parallel kinetics, peaking at day 7 and then decreasing at days 10 to 14. The concordance of levels of HIV DNA and p24 antigen suggested that the changes in susceptibility with monocyte maturation were at or immediately after entry and correlated well with CCR5 expression and inversely with CXCR4 expression.     

Rabbit Cells Expressing Human CD4 and Human CCR5 Are Highly Permissive for Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection

To evaluate the feasibility of using transgenic rabbits expressing CCR5 and CD4 as a small-animal model of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV) disease, we examined whether the expression of the human chemokine receptor (CCR5) and human CD4 would render a rabbit cell line (SIRC) permissive to HIV replication. Histologically, SIRC cells expressing CD4 and CCR5 formed multinucleated cells (syncytia) upon exposure to BaL, a macrophagetropic strain of HIV that uses CCR5 for cell entry. Intracellular viral capsid p24 staining showed abundant viral gene expression in BaL-infected SIRC cells expressing CD4 and CCR5. In contrast, neither SIRC cells expressing CD4 alone nor murine 3T3 cells expressing CCR5 and CD4 exhibited significant expression of p24. These stably transfected rabbit cells were also highly permissive for the production of virions upon infection by two other CCR5-dependent strains (JR-CSF and YU-2) but not by a CXCR4-dependent strain (NL4-3). The functional integrity of these virions was demonstrated by the successful infection of human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) with viral stocks prepared from these transfected rabbit cells. Furthermore, primary rabbit PBMC were found to be permissive for production of infectious virions after circumventing the cellular entry step. These results suggest that a transgenic rabbit model for the study of HIV disease may be feasible.     

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

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

Exclusive and Persistent Use of the Entry Coreceptor CXCR4 by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 from a Subject Homozygous for CCR5 Δ32

Individuals who are homozygous for the 32-bp deletion in the gene coding for the chemokine receptor and major human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) coreceptor CCR5 (CCR5 −/−) lack functional cell surface CCR5 molecules and are relatively resistant to HIV-1 infection. HIV-1 infection in CCR5 −/− individuals, although rare, has been increasingly documented. We now report that the viral quasispecies from one such individual throughout disease is homogenous, T cell line tropic, and phenotypically syncytium inducing (SI); exclusively uses CXCR4; and replicates well in CCR5 −/− primary T cells. The recently discovered coreceptors BOB and Bonzo are not used. Although early and persistent SI variants have been described in longitudinal studies, this is the first demonstration of exclusive and persistent CXCR4 usage. With the caveat that the earliest viruses available from this subject were from approximately 4 years following primary infection, these data suggest that HIV-1 infection can be mediated and persistently maintained by viruses which exclusively utilize CXCR4. The lack of evolution toward the available minor coreceptors in this subject underscores the dominant biological roles of the major coreceptors CCR5 and CXCR4. This and two similar subjects (R. Biti, R. Ffrench, J. Young, B. Bennetts, G. Stewart, and T. Liang, Nat. Med. 3:252–253, 1997; I. Theodoreu, L. Meyer, M. Magierowska, C. Katlama, and C. Rouzioux, Lancet 349:1219–1220, 1997) showed relatively rapid CD4⁺ T-cell declines despite average or low initial viral RNA load. Since viruses which use CXCR4 exclusively cannot infect macrophages, these data have implications for the relative infection of the T-cell compartment versus the macrophage compartment in vivo and for the development of CCR5-based therapeutics.     

Coreceptor Utilization by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Is Not a Primary Determinant of Neutralization Sensitivity

We have examined the relationship between coreceptor utilization and sensitivity to neutralization in a primary isolate of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 and its T-cell line-adapted (TCLA) derivative. We determined that adaptation of the primary-isolate (PI) virus 168P results in the loss of the unique capacity of PI viruses to utilize the CCR5 coreceptor and in the acquisition by the TCLA 168C virus of sensitivity to neutralization by V3-directed monoclonal antibodies (MAbs). In experiments wherein infection by 168P is directed via either the CCR5 or the CXCR4 pathway, we demonstrate that the virus, as well as pseudotyped virions bearing a molecularly cloned 168P envelope protein, remains refractory to neutralization by MAbs 257-D, 268-D, and 50.1 regardless of the coreceptor utilized. This study suggests that coreceptor utilization is not a primary determinant of differential neutralization sensitivity in PI and TCLA viruses.Although CD4 had long been recognized as the cellular receptor to which the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV) envelope protein binds (9, 21, 22), it had also been recognized that expression of CD4 alone is insufficient to render nonhuman cells susceptible to HIV infection (4, 5, 22). Similarly, different HIV isolates display different abilities to infect CD4-positive human macrophages, T lymphocytes, and established T-cell lines (31, 32, 35), suggesting that additional molecules may be responsible for cell tropism specificity. During the past year, cellular molecules that act in conjunction with CD4 have been identified as required cofactors for HIV envelope protein-mediated binding and entry (1, 6, 10–12, 14). These HIV coreceptors are members of the superfamily of seven-transmembrane segment G-protein-coupled receptors and act primarily as cellular receptors for chemokines.The discovery of cellular coreceptors for HIV has provided new perspectives for understanding these early events in HIV infection (see review in reference 2). Thus, phenotypically distinct isolates of HIV utilize as coreceptors different chemokine receptor molecules. Although all primary isolates of HIV infect primary T lymphocytes, some also infect cells of the macrophage lineage (31, 32). These monocyteropic isolates utilize the CCR5 chemokine receptor, whose natural ligands include the chemokines RANTES, MIP-1α, and MIP-1β (1, 6, 10–12). Monocytropic isolates do not induce syncytia in primary lymphocyte culture and do not infect established T-cell lines (31). During the late course of HIV infection, syncytium-inducing (SI) primary viruses often arise from the population of monocytropic viruses (31, 32). These SI primary isolates no longer infect macrophages, and they utilize both CCR5 and another chemokine receptor, CXCR4 (7, 33, 38). CXCR4, whose natural chemokine ligand is SDF-1 (3, 27), was originally identified by Feng et al. as the cofactor used by laboratory-adapted viruses (14). In fact, the common laboratory viruses (IIIb/LAI, LAV, and RF) are unable to utilize CCR5 coreceptor (1, 6, 10–12), presumably reflecting the lack of CCR5 expression in most established T-cell lines (1, 13). Although some primary isolates utilize additional chemokine receptor molecules, notably CCR3 and CCR2b (6, 11, 18), the relationship between these coreceptors and viral phenotypes is less clear. The ability to utilize CCR5 coreceptor, however, is unique to primary-isolate (PI) viruses.Paralleling these differences in coreceptor utilization and cell tropism are differences in sensitivity to virus neutralization. Although laboratory-adapted isolates of HIV can be potently neutralized by sera elicited by recombinant gp120 (rgp120) protein, primary isolates are largely refractory to neutralization by rgp120 vaccine sera (23, 37). Similarly, PI viruses are significantly more resistant than T-cell line-adapted (TCLA) viruses to neutralization by gp120-directed monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) (25, 37) and to inhibition by soluble forms of CD4 (8). We and others have demonstrated that neutralization sensitivity develops concomitantly with adaptation of primary isolates to persistent growth in established T-cell lines (24, 37). By studying pedigreed PI and TCLA viruses (168P and 168C, respectively), we have shown that adaptation renders the TCLA virus sensitive not only to rgp120 vaccine sera and CD4 immunoadhesin but also to MAbs directed to the V3 loop of gp120 (37). However, the basis for this increase in neutralization sensitivity remains unclear.In this report, we explore the relationship between neutralization sensitivity and coreceptor utilization, especially with regard to changes that accompany adaptation. We examined neutralization sensitivity of the well-characterized SI primary isolate 168P under experimental conditions where infection can be directed via either the CXCR4 or the CCR5 pathway. The pedigreed TCLA derivative 168C utilizes only CXCR4 and was sensitive to neutralization by the panel of V3-directed MAbs used in these assays. However, the primary isolate 168P remained refractory to neutralization regardless of coreceptor pathway taken. Our findings suggest that envelope protein structure, and not coreceptor utilization, is the primary determinant of differential neutralization sensitivity in PI and TCLA viruses.

Coreceptor utilization by pedigreed PI and TCLA viruses.

Cross-sectional surveys of coreceptor use have shown that primary SI isolates generally utilize CXCR4 and CCR5 coreceptors, whereas unrelated laboratory-adapted isolates utilize only CXCR4 (1, 6, 7, 10–12, 14, 33, 38). We wished to confirm this trend in a longitudinal study of adaptation. We previously described the adaptation of the SI primary isolate 168P to persistent growth in the FDA/H9 T-cell line and the concomitant development of neutralization sensitivity in the resulting TCLA virus 168C (37). In the present study, the ability of these pedigreed viruses to utilize specific coreceptors was tested by infection of U87 human glioma cell lines expressing CD4 (U87-CD4) and the specific coreceptor (19).For this assay, virus stocks were prepared from cell culture supernatants of phytohemagglutinin (PHA)-stimulated peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBLs) (168P) or FDA/H9 cells (168C) and standardized to yield a submaximal number of foci of infection on U87-CD4-CXCR4 cells (approximately 100 to 200 foci/96-well microplate culture). To confirm coreceptor specificity, in some assays CCR5 chemokines (each at 500 ng/ml) were added to cells 1 h prior to infection. After 2 days of incubation, cell monolayers were fixed with methanol-acetone and immunochemically stained with HIV immunoglobulin (HIVIG) (29), anti-human ABC kit (Biomeda Corp.), and diaminobenzidine substrate.Figure ​Figure11 confirms the ability of the SI 168P virus to utilize both CXCR4 and CCR5 and the subsequent loss of this latter specificity in the 168C TCLA virus. Infection was dependent on coreceptor expression, and both PI and TCLA viruses could also utilize CCR3 (data not presented). Open in a separate windowFIG. 1Coreceptor utilization by pedigreed PI and TCLA 168 viruses. U87-CD4 cell lines expressing CXCR4 (▪) or CCR5 () were used to define the ability of 168P and 168C viruses to utilize the respective coreceptor. CCR5 utilization was further tested by the addition to U87-CD4-CCR5 cells of CCR5-specific chemokines (RANTES, MIP-1α, and MIP-1β; R&D Systems) (□). For details, see text. ∗, no foci were observed.In keeping with the determined coreceptor specificity, infection could be blocked by addition of coreceptor-specific ligands. Thus, 168P virus infection of CCR5-expressing cells was blocked by the CCR5-specific ligands RANTES, MIP-1α, and MIP-1β (1, 6, 10–12) (Fig. ​(Fig.1).1). Similarly, infection of CXCR4-expressing U87-CD4 cells by either virus could be blocked by the CXCR4-specific chemokine ligand SDF-1 (3, 27) (data not presented).

Coreceptor pathway and neutralization sensitivity.

In previous work, we demonstrated that the PI 168P virus is refractory to neutralization by HIV MN gp120 vaccine sera and by several well-characterized V3-directed murine MAbs which strongly neutralize infectivity of the TCLA 168C virus (37). In the present study, we extended the panel of MAbs to include two V3-directed human MAbs, 257-D and 268-D (17). These well-characterized human MAbs recognize core epitopes at the crown of the V3 loop of gp120 (KRIHI and HIGPGR, respectively), linear sequences known to be present in both 168P and 168C envelope proteins (37). These epitope predictions were confirmed by gp120 capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (26) which demonstrated equal binding to envelope protein in detergent-solubilized 168P and 168C virions (data not presented). Sensitivity to neutralization by these human MAbs was determined in a standard assay using PHA-activated PBLs (37). MAbs 257-D and 268-D were found to potently neutralize 168C but fail to neutralize 168P (Fig. ​(Fig.2).2). This pattern of neutralization sensitivity is similar to that previously described for the V3-directed murine MAb 50.1 (30, 36, 37). Open in a separate windowFIG. 2Neutralization sensitivity of 168 viruses in PBL culture. Virus neutralization assays in PHA-stimulated PBL culture were performed as previously described (37). 168P (○, •) and 168C (□, ▪) virus stocks were standardized to yield submaximal extents of virus spread during the 5-day infection. CCR5-specific chemokines (•, ▪) were added as described for Fig. ​Fig.1.1. The V3-directed MAbs are indicated. p24 antigen was determined by p24 antigen capture ELISA (SAIC Frederick) and was normalized to infected cell control values (168P, 190 ng/ml [170 ng/ml with chemokines]; 168C, 36 ng/ml [33 ng/ml with chemokines]).To examine whether sensitivity to neutralization was affected by the coreceptor pathway utilized in infection of PBLs, we used inhibitory concentrations of CCR5-specific chemokine ligands RANTES, MIP-1α, and MIP-1β in order to restrict infection to the CXCR4 pathway. Addition of these chemokines to the PBL cultures did not affect virus growth, nor did it affect sensitivity to neutralization by the V3-directed human MAbs (Fig. ​(Fig.2).2). To the extent that CCR5 blockade was complete, these results suggest that the simple availability of the CCR5 pathway is not a factor in the resistance of PI viruses to neutralization.To strengthen this conclusion, we examined neutralization sensitivity in human U87-CD4 cell lines expressing only CXCR4 or CCR5. Using this method, we confirmed that the SI 168P virus remained refractory to neutralization by human MAbs 257-D and 268-D as well as by the murine MAb 50.1, regardless of whether infection occurred via CXCR4 or CCR5 (Fig. ​(Fig.3).3). These results suggest that availability of the CCR5 pathway is not a primary determinant for the resistance of PI viruses to neutralization. The TCLA 168C virus utilized CXCR4 only and was sensitive to neutralization. Open in a separate windowFIG. 3Neutralization sensitivity of 168 viruses in U87-CD4 cell lines expressing CCR5 or CXCR4 coreceptor. 168P (○, •) and 168C (▪) viruses were used to infect U87-CD4 cell lines expressing CXCR4 (•, ▪) or CCR5 (○) as described for Fig. ​Fig.1.1. The V3-directed MAbs were incubated with virus for 1 h prior to infection.

Molecularly cloned PI and TCLA envelope genes.

To understand better the changes that accompany adaptation and those that determine coreceptor utilization and neutralization sensitivity, we molecularly cloned the envelope genes of the 168P and 168C viruses. High-fidelity XL PCR (rTth and Vent DNA polymerases; PE Applied Biosystems) and primers envA and envN (15) were used to amplify a 3.1-kb region of proviral DNA encoding the rev and envelope genes. PCR products were isolated by unidirectional T/A cloning in the eucaryotic expression vector pCR3.1-Uni (Invitrogen). Expression in pCR3.1-Uni is driven by the cytomegalovirus immediate-early promoter. Multiple clones were isolated from each virus, and transient transfection studies in COS-7 cells confirmed the surface expression and fusion competence of all clones tested (data not presented).DNA sequence analysis demonstrated that all 168C molecular clones analyzed encoded the three adaptation-associated amino acid changes previously identified by PCR sequencing of the 168C virus population (V2, I166R; C2, I282N; and V3, G318R) (37). Two molecular clones of each 168P and 168C envelope were subjected to complete DNA sequence analysis (GenBank accession no. {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"AF035532","term_id":"2827997","term_text":"AF035532"}}AF035532 to {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"AF035534","term_id":"2828001","term_text":"AF035534"}}AF035534). Molecular clones 168C23 and 168C60 were identical throughout the envelope gene. Molecular clones 168P5 and 168P23 differed from each other and from the previously determined sequence at four to five positions distinct from those associated with adaptation. These scattered changes within the primary virus quasispecies are considered inconsequential at the present level of analysis; the significance of the three adaptation-associated changes is under separate investigation.Functional analysis of these molecularly cloned envelope genes was performed by incorporation of the molecularly cloned envelope protein into pseudotyped HIV virions. We used an envelope-defective provirus derived from the molecularly cloned NL4-3 provirus (kindly provided by I. S. Y. Chen, University of California, Los Angeles). The pNLthyΔBgl provirus (28) contains a BglII-BglII deletion within the envelope gene and a substitution of the viral nef gene with a cDNA encoding the murine Thy1.2 cell surface protein. The simian virus 40 ori was subsequently introduced into the plasmid to generate pSVNLthyΔBgl (27a). Cotransfection of COS-7 cells (16, 20) with pSVNLthyΔBgl provirus and the envelope expression plasmid resulted in the production of pseudotyped HIV virions. Culture supernatants were harvested 3 days posttransfection, filtered, and used to infect U87-CD4 cell lines expressing coreceptor. Cells infected by virions bearing the complementing envelope protein were identified by immunostaining for murine Thy1.2 or HIV proteins.As anticipated, the molecularly cloned envelope proteins recapitulated the coreceptor specificity of the parental virus population (see the legend to Fig. ​Fig.4).4). Pseudotyped virions containing 168C60 were able to infect only U87-CD4 cells expressing CXCR4, while virions containing 168P23 envelope were able to infect U87-CD4 cells expressing either CCR5 or CXCR4. Thus, the viral envelope protein appears to be the major, if not sole, determinant of viral coreceptor use. These findings also indicate that dual coreceptor use is a direct property of the envelope protein complex and not a result of a mixture of distinct envelope proteins in the SI virus population. This conclusion is corroborated by the failure of CCR5-specific chemokine ligands to diminish 168P virus infection in PBL culture (Fig. ​(Fig.22).Open in a separate windowFIG. 4Neutralization sensitivity of pseudotyped virions in U87-CD4 cell lines expressing CCR5 or CXCR4 coreceptor. Pseudotyped virions were derived by cotransfection of COS-7 cells with pSVNLthyΔBgl provirus and plasmid expressing 168P23 (○, •) or 168C60 (▪) envelope protein. Virion preparations were incubated with U87-CD4 cell lines expressing CXCR4 (•, ▪) or CCR5 (○) as described for Fig. ​Fig.1;1; V3-directed MAbs were added as indicated. The number of foci was normalized to control values (60 to 100 foci/well for U87-CD4-CXCR4 cells; 10 foci/well for U87-CD4-CCR5 cells). ∗, no foci were observed.Finally, we wished to determine the neutralization sensitivity of pseudotyped virions containing the molecularly cloned 168P23 and 168C60 envelope proteins and to confirm that coreceptor pathway is not a primary determinant of neutralization sensitivity. We found that infection of U87-CD4-CXCR4 cells by pseudotyped virions containing 168C60 envelope protein was sensitive to neutralization by MAbs 257-D, 268-D, and 50.1 at concentrations comparable to those determined in assays using 168C virus (Fig. ​(Fig.4).4). Pseudotyped virions containing 168P23 envelope protein remained refractory to neutralization by all three V3-directed MAbs, regardless of the coreceptor expressed by the U87-CD4 cell line. In summary, we examined the relationship between coreceptor utilization and sensitivity to neutralization by V3-directed MAbs. The observed dichotomy in the sensitivity to neutralization of PI and TCLA viruses had suggested a discrete difference between these viruses, and we tested one hypothesis: that PI viruses are refractory to neutralization as a result of their unique ability to utilize the CCR5 coreceptor. We examined neutralization sensitivity of a well-characterized SI primary isolate under experimental conditions wherein the virus was forced to utilize either CCR5 or CXCR4 for infection. We showed that coreceptor pathway is not a direct determinant of neutralization sensitivity. The primary virus envelope protein remained refractory to neutralization by V3-directed MAbs regardless of the coreceptor pathway utilized. Similarly, coreceptor utilization did not affect neutralization sensitivity by soluble CD4 (34) or HIVIG (data not presented).In discarding the otherwise attractive hypothesis that PI viruses escape neutralization through their unique ability to utilize CCR5, we are left to consider the as yet undefined structural differences between the envelope protein complex of PI and TCLA viruses. Several studies have suggested that critical determinants in the envelope protein of PI viruses are less accessible than those of TCLA viruses and that it is this differential access that determines neutralization sensitivity (reviewed in reference 25). By contrast, our studies have indicated similar binding of V3-directed MAbs to PBLs infected with neutralization-resistant isolate 168P or neutralization-sensitive isolate 168C (37). Thus, the basis for the differential neutralization sensitivity of PI and TCLA viruses remains unresolved.Our present studies also do not address whether changes in coreceptor utilization and/or neutralization sensitivity are necessarily linked as a consequence of adaptation. The analysis of independently derived PI and TCLA viruses may allow further separation of these viral phenotypes. Subsequent dissection of the amino acid changes that distinguish pedigreed PI and TCLA envelope proteins will help to define the structural bases underlying the changes that accompany adaptation.     

Adaptive Mutations in the V3 Loop of gp120 Enhance Fusogenicity of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 and Enable Use of a CCR5 Coreceptor That Lacks the Amino-Terminal Sulfated Region

To identify sites in gp120 that interact with the CCR5 coreceptor and to analyze the mechanisms of infection, we selected variants of the CCR5-dependent JRCSF molecular clone of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) that adapted to replicate in HeLa-CD4 cells that express the mutant coreceptor CCR5(Y14N) or CCR5(G163R), which were previously shown to bind purified gp120-CD4 complexes only weakly. Correspondingly, these mutant CCR5s mediate infections of wild-type virus only at relatively high cell surface concentrations, demonstrating a concentration-dependent assembly requirement for infection. The plots of viral infectivity versus concentration of coreceptors had sigmoidal shapes, implying involvement of multiple coreceptors, with an estimated stoichiometry of four to six CCR5s in the active complexes. All of the adapted viruses had mutations in the V3 loops of their gp120s. The titers of recombinant HIV-1 virions with these V3 mutations were determined in previously described panels of HeLa-CD4 cell clones that express discrete amounts of CCR5(Y14N) or CCR5(G163R). The V3 loop mutations did not alter viral utilization of wild-type CCR5, but they specifically enhanced utilization of the mutant CCR5s by two distinct mechanisms. Several mutant envelope glycoproteins were highly fusogenic in syncytium assays, and these all increased the efficiency of infection of the CCR5(Y14N) or CCR5(G163R) clonal panels without enhancing virus adsorption onto the cells or viral affinity for the coreceptor. In contrast, V3 loop mutation N300Y was selected during virus replication in cells that contained only a trace of CCR5(Y14N) and this mutation increased the apparent affinity of the virus for this coreceptor, as indicated by a shift in the sigmoid-shaped infectivity curve toward lower concentrations. Surprisingly, N300Y increased viral affinity for the second extracellular loop of CCR5(Y14N) rather than for the mutated amino terminus. Indeed, the resulting virus was able to use a mutant CCR5 that lacks 16 amino acids at its amino terminus, a region previously considered essential for CCR5 coreceptor function. Our results demonstrate that the role of CCR5 in infection involves at least two steps that can be strongly and differentially altered by mutations in either CCR5 or the V3 loop of gp120: a concentration-dependent binding step that assembles a critical multivalent virus-coreceptor complex and a postassembly step that likely involves a structural rearrangement of the complex. The postassembly step can severely limit HIV-1 infections and is not an automatic consequence of virus-coreceptor binding, as was previously assumed. These results have important implications for our understanding of the mechanism of HIV-1 infection and the factors that may select for fusogenic gp120 variants during AIDS progression.     

A Cell Line-Based Neutralization Assay for Primary Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Isolates That Use either the CCR5 or the CXCR4 Coreceptor

We describe here a cell line-based assay for the evaluation of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) neutralization. The assay is based on CEM.NKR cells, transfected to express the HIV-1 coreceptor CCR5 to supplement the endogenous expression of CD4 and the CXCR4 coreceptor. The resulting CEM.NKR-CCR5 cells efficiently replicate primary HIV-1 isolates of both R5 and X4 phenotypes. A comparison of the CEM.NKR-CCR5 cells with mitogen-activated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) in neutralization assays with sera from HIV-1-infected individuals or specific anti-HIV-1 monoclonal antibodies shows that the sensitivity of HIV-1 neutralization is similar in the two cell types. The CEM.NKR-CCR5 cell assay, however, is more convenient to perform and eliminates the donor-to-donor variation in HIV-1 replication efficiency, which is one of the principal drawbacks of the PBMC-based neutralization assay. We suggest that this new assay is suitable for the general measurement of HIV-1 neutralization by antibodies.     

Use of G-Protein-Coupled and -Uncoupled CCR5 Receptors by CCR5 Inhibitor-Resistant and -Sensitive Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Variants

Small-molecule CCR5 inhibitors such as vicriviroc (VVC) and maraviroc (MVC) are allosteric modulators that impair HIV-1 entry by stabilizing a CCR5 conformation that the virus recognizes inefficiently. Viruses resistant to these compounds are able to bind the inhibitor-CCR5 complex while also interacting with the free coreceptor. CCR5 also interacts intracellularly with G proteins, as part of its signal transduction functions, and this process alters its conformation. Here we investigated whether the action of VVC against inhibitor-sensitive and -resistant viruses is affected by whether or not CCR5 is coupled to G proteins such as Gα_i. Treating CD4⁺ T cells with pertussis toxin to uncouple the Gα_i subunit from CCR5 increased the potency of VVC against the sensitive viruses and revealed that VVC-resistant viruses use the inhibitor-bound form of Gα_i-coupled CCR5 more efficiently than they use uncoupled CCR5. Supportive evidence was obtained by expressing a signaling-deficient CCR5 mutant with an impaired ability to bind to G proteins, as well as two constitutively active mutants that activate G proteins in the absence of external stimuli. The implication of these various studies is that the association of intracellular domains of CCR5 with the signaling machinery affects the conformation of the external and transmembrane domains and how they interact with small-molecule inhibitors of HIV-1 entry.     

Expression of CCR5 Increases during Monocyte Differentiation and Directly Mediates Macrophage Susceptibility to Infection by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1

The stage of differentiation and the lineage of CD4⁺ cells profoundly affect their susceptibility to infection by human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). While CD4⁺ T lymphocytes in patients are readily susceptible to HIV-1 infection, peripheral blood monocytes are relatively resistant during acute or early infection, even though monocytes also express CD4 and viral strains with macrophage (M)-tropic phenotypes predominate. CCR5, the main coreceptor for M-tropic viruses, clearly contributes to the ability of CD4⁺ T cells to be infected. To determine whether low levels of CCR5 expression account for the block in infection of monocytes, we examined primary monocyte lineage cells during differentiation. Culturing of blood monocytes for 5 days led to an increase in the mean number of CCR5-positive cells from <20% of monocytes to >80% of monocyte-derived macrophages (MDM). Levels of CCR5 expression per monocyte were generally lower than those on MDM, perhaps below a minimum threshold level necessary for efficient infection. Productive infection may be restricted to the small subset of monocytes that express relatively high levels of CCR5. Steady-state CCR5 mRNA levels also increased four- to fivefold during MDM differentiation. Infection of MDM by M-tropic HIV-1_JRFL resulted in >10-fold-higher levels of p24, and MDM harbored >30-fold more HIV-1 DNA copies than monocytes. In the presence of the CCR5-specific monoclonal antibody (MAb) 2D7, virus production and cellular levels of HIV-1 DNA were decreased by >80% in MDM, indicating a block in viral entry. There was a direct association between levels of CCR5 and differentiation of monocytes to macrophages. Levels of CCR5 were related to monocyte resistance and macrophage susceptibility to infection because infection by the M-tropic strain HIV-1_JRFL could be blocked by MAb 2D7. These results provide direct evidence that CCR5 functions as a coreceptor for HIV-1 infection of primary macrophages.     

Multiple Residues Contribute to the Inability of Murine CCR-5 To Function as a Coreceptor for Macrophage-Tropic Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Isolates

Infection of CD4-positive cells by human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) requires functional interaction of the viral envelope protein with a coreceptor belonging to the chemokine receptor family of seven-membrane-spanning receptors. For the majority of macrophage-tropic HIV-1 isolates, the physiologically relevant coreceptor is the human CCR-5 (hCCR-5) receptor. Although the murine homolog of CCR-5 (mCCR-5) is unable to mediate HIV-1 infection, chimeric hCCR-5/mCCR-5 molecules containing single extracellular domains derived from hCCR-5 are effective coreceptors for certain macrophage-tropic HIV-1 isolates. Here, we have sought to identify residues in hCCR-5 critical for HIV-1 infection by substitution of mCCR-5-derived residues into the context of functional chimeric hCCR-5/mCCR-5 receptor molecules. Using this strategy, we demonstrate that residues 7, 13, and 15 in the first extracellular domain and residue 180 in the third extracellular domain of CCR-5 are important for HIV-1 envelope-mediated membrane fusion. Of interest, certain substitutions, for example, at residues 184 and 185 in the third extracellular domain, have no phenotype when introduced individually but strongly inhibit hCCR-5 coreceptor function when present together. We hypothesize that these changes, which do not preclude chemokine receptor function, may inhibit a conformational transition in hCCR-5 that contributes to HIV-1 infection. Finally, we report that substitution of glycine for valine at residue 5 in CCR-5 can significantly enhance the level of envelope-dependent cell fusion by expressing cells. The diversity of the mutant phenotypes observed in this mutational analysis, combined with their wide distribution across the extracellular regions of CCR-5, emphasizes the complexity of the interaction between HIV-1 envelope and coreceptor.Infection of cells by human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) requires interaction of the viral envelope protein with not only CD4 but also a second cell surface molecule, termed a coreceptor (reviewed in reference 19). Coreceptor usage varies significantly among different HIV-1 isolates, although all known coreceptors are members of the G-protein-coupled chemokine receptor family of seven-membrane-spanning receptors. The primary coreceptor used by non-syncytium-inducing, macrophage-tropic (M-tropic) HIV-1 isolates, which constitute the majority of primary isolates, is CCR-5 (1, 6, 8, 12, 27). In contrast, syncytium-inducing, T-cell-line-adapted (T-tropic) HIV-1 isolates predominantly use CXCR-4 as a coreceptor (13). Other chemokine receptors utilized by a small percentage of generally dualtropic HIV-1 isolates include CCR-2b and CCR-3 (6, 11). The importance of two orphan chemokine receptors, termed Bonzo/STRL33 and BOB/GPR15, in infection by HIV-1 remains to be established, although these proteins were recently shown to serve as coreceptors for several simian immunodeficiency virus and HIV-2 isolates (2, 9). The critical importance of CCR-5 for infection by primary, M-tropic HIV-1 isolates, however, has been highlighted by the finding that a small percentage of humans lack a functional CCR-5 gene and as a result appear highly, although not completely, resistant to infection by HIV-1 (17, 22). Importantly, primary T cells derived from such individuals are refractory to infection by M-tropic HIV-1 isolates in vitro (17, 22, 27), thus demonstrating that CCR-5 is the physiologically relevant coreceptor for the majority of primary isolates.At present, relatively little is known about how the viral envelope and coreceptor interact, although it appears clear that interaction is dependent upon a prior conformational shift induced by binding of the envelope gp120 subunit to CD4 (24, 26). This in turn is believed to lead to the formation of a ternary complex, consisting of gp120, coreceptor, and CD4, on the surface of the target cell (15, 24, 26). It is unknown how this protein complex then induces the fusion of the viral and host cell membranes, although the envelope gp41 subunit is believed to play a critical role at this stage.An important unresolved question is the identity of the amino acid residues in gp120 and the coreceptor that interact during infection. However, it is well established that HIV-1 tropism, and hence coreceptor usage, is largely controlled by a small number of residues located in the envelope V3 loop (6, 14, 23, 25). Efforts to identify residues in the CCR-5 coreceptor involved in mediating infection have thus far largely focused on the functional analysis of chimeric receptors generated with human CCR-5 (hCCR-5) and a chemokine receptor lacking coreceptor function, such as the murine CCR-5 homolog (mCCR-5) (3, 5, 20, 21). These studies have led to three major conclusions. Firstly, the residues in hCCR-5 involved in mediating HIV-1 infection are diffuse, being located on at least three of the four extracellular domains of CCR-5. Secondly, these residues are functionally redundant, so that several distinct regions of hCCR-5 can suffice independently to confer coreceptor function when substituted into mCCR-5. Lastly, different HIV-1 envelope proteins interact differently with CCR-5, such that CCR-5 residues important for mediating fusion by one envelope protein may be largely irrelevant to the interaction of CCR-5 with a second envelope protein. Overall, these data demonstrate that the envelope–CCR-5 interaction is likely to be highly complex and to involve the interaction of multiple residues in both proteins.As noted above, the mCCR-5 chemokine receptor, despite extensive sequence similarity to hCCR-5, fails to function as an HIV-1 coreceptor (3, 5, 20). Therefore, it is apparent that one or more of the 20 extracellular residues that differ between mCCR-5 and hCCR-5 must contribute to the interaction with the HIV-1 envelope protein. Using mutational analysis in the context of chimeric mCCR-5/hCCR-5 receptors, we have now identified several residues, located in three of the four extracellular domains of hCCR-5, that play roles in mediating infection by HIV-1.     

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 the Critical Domain in the V3 Loop of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 gp120 Involved in CCR5 Utilization

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection of CD4(+) lymphocytes and macrophages involves interaction of the surface subunit of the envelope protein (gp120) with coreceptors. Isolates have been found with specific tropism for macrophages and/or T-cell lines, through the utilization of chemokine receptor CCR5 (R5) or CXCR4 (X4). The third hypervariable loop (V3 loop) of gp120 is the major determinant of tropism. Using chimeric envelopes between HXB2 (X4) and ADA (R5), we found that the C-terminal half of the V3 loop was sufficient to confer on HXB2 the ability to infect CCR5-expressing cells. A sequence motif was identified at positions 289 to 292 allowing 30% of wild-type levels of infection, whereas full activity was achieved with the conversion of Lys to Glu at position 287 in addition to the above motif. Moreover, V3 loops from either SF2 (X4R5) or SF162 (R5) also allowed infection of CCR5-expressing cells, supporting the importance of V3 loops in influencing CCR5 utilization. The effects of amino acid changes at position 287 on the level of infection via CCR5 showed that negatively charged residues (Glu and Asp) were optimal for efficient interaction whereas only bulky hydrophobic residues drastically reduced infection. In addition, sequences at the N terminus of the V3 loop independently modulated the level of infection via CCR5. This study also examined the susceptibility of chimeric envelopes to neutralization by anticoreceptor antibodies and suggested the presence of differential interaction between the chimeric envelopes and CCR5. These findings highlight the critical residues in the V3 loop that mediate HIV-1 infection.