Cargando…

Cyclophilin A promotes HIV-1 reverse transcription but its effect on transduction correlates best with its effect on nuclear entry of viral cDNA

BACKGROUND: The human peptidyl-prolyl isomerase Cyclophilin A (CypA) binds HIV-1 capsid (CA) and influences early steps in the HIV-1 replication cycle. The mechanism by which CypA regulates HIV-1 transduction efficiency is unknown. Disruption of CypA binding to CA, either by genetic means or by the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Iaco, Alberto, Luban, Jeremy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3916700/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24479545
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1742-4690-11-11
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The human peptidyl-prolyl isomerase Cyclophilin A (CypA) binds HIV-1 capsid (CA) and influences early steps in the HIV-1 replication cycle. The mechanism by which CypA regulates HIV-1 transduction efficiency is unknown. Disruption of CypA binding to CA, either by genetic means or by the competitive inhibitor cyclosporine A (CsA), reduces the efficiency of HIV-1 transduction in some cells but not in others. Transduction of certain cell types increases significantly when CypA binding to particular HIV-1 CA mutants, i.e., A92E, is prevented. Previous studies have suggested that this cell type-specific effect is due to a dominant-acting, CypA-dependent restriction factor. RESULTS: Here we investigated the mechanism by which CypA regulates HIV-1 transduction efficiency using 27 different human cell lines, 32 HeLa subclones, and several previously characterized HIV-1 CA mutants. Disruption of CypA binding to wild-type CA, or to any of the mutant CAs, caused a decrease in HIV-1 reverse transcription in all the cell lines analyzed here. This block to reverse transcription, though, did not correlate with cell type-specific effects on transduction efficiency. The level of 2-LTR circles, a marker for nuclear transport of the viral cDNA that results from reverse transcription, correlated closely with effects on infectivity. No correlation was observed between the cell type-specific effects on infectivity and the steady-state CypA protein levels in these cells. Instead, as indicated by a fate-of-capsid assay, CsA released the HIV-1 CA core from an apparent state of hyperstabilization, in a cell type-specific manner. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that, while CypA promotes reverse transcription under all conditions tested here, its effect on HIV-1 infectivity correlates more closely with effects on nuclear entry of the viral cDNA. The data also support the hypothesis that a cell-type specific CypA-dependent restriction factor blocks HIV-1 replication by delaying CA core uncoating and hindering nuclear entry.