4.8 Article

Reduction of CCR5 with low-dose rapamycin enhances the antiviral activity of vicriviroc against both sensitive and drug-resistant HIV-1

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0810843106

关键词

chemokine receptor 5 antagonists; coreceptor density; HIV resistance; vicriviroc resistance; maraviroc

资金

  1. Oregon Health Sciences University
  2. New York University School of Medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vicriviroc (VCV) is a chemokine (C-C motif) receptor 5 (CCR5) antagonist with potent anti-HIV activity that currently is being evaluated in phase III clinical trials. In the present study, donor CCR5 density (CCR5 receptors/CD4 lymphocytes) inversely correlated with VCV antiviral activity (Spearman's correlation test; r = 0.746, P = 0.0034). Low doses of the transplant drug rapamycin (RAPA) reduced CCR5 density and enhanced VCV antiviral activity. In drug interaction studies, the RAPA/VCV combination had considerable antiviral synergy (combination indexes of 0.1-0.04) in both multicycle and single-cycle infection of lymphocytes. The synergy between RAPA and VCV translated into dose reduction indexes of 8- to 41-fold reductions for RAPA and 19- to 658-fold reductions for VCV. RAPA enhanced VCV antiviral activity against both B and non-B clade isolates, potently suppressing clade G viruses with reported reduced sensitivities to VCV and to the licensed CCR5 antagonist maraviroc. Importantly, RAPA reduction of CCR5 density in lymphocytes sensitized VCV-resistant strains to VCV, inhibiting virus production by similar to 90%. We further demonstrated the role of CCR5 density on VCV activity against resistant virus in donor lymphocytes and in cell lines expressing varying CCR5 densities. Together, these results suggest that low doses of RAPA may increase the durability of VCV-containing regimens in patients by enhancing VCV viral suppression, by allowing the use of lower doses of VCV with reduced potential for toxicity, and by controlling emerging VCV-resistant variants.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据