4.6 Review

Hepatitis B virus replication

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 48-64

出版社

W J G PRESS
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i1.48

关键词

chaperone-mediated reverse transcription; HBV cccDNA; hepadnavirus; P protein; pregenomic RNA; protein-priming; reverse transcriptase; RNA encapsidation signal

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hepadnaviruses, including human hepatitis B virus (HBV), replicate through reverse transcription of an RNA intermediate, the pregenomic RNA (pgRNA). Despite this kinship to retroviruses, there are fundamental differences beyond the fact that hepadnavirions contain DNA instead of RNA. Most peculiar is the initiation of reverse transcription: it occurs by protein-priming, is strictly committed to using an RNA hairpin on the pgRNA, epsilon, as template, and depends on cellular chaperones; moreover, proper replication can apparently occur only in the specialized environment of intact nucleocapsids. This complexity has hampered an in-depth mechanistic understanding. The recent successful reconstitution in the test tube of active replication initiation complexes from purified components, for duck HBV (DHBV), now allows for the analysis of the biochemistry of hepadnaviral replication at the molecular level. Here we review the current state of knowledge at all steps of the hepadnaviral genome replication cycle, with emphasis on new insights that turned up by the use of such cell-free systems. At this time, they can, unfortunately, not be complemented by three-dimensional structural information on the involved components. However, at least for the epsilon RNA element such information is emerging, raising expectations that combining biophysics with biochemistry and genetics will soon provide a powerful integrated approach for solving the many outstanding questions. The ultimate, though most challenging goal, will be to visualize the hepadnaviral reverse transcriptase in the act of synthesizing DNA, which will also have strong implications for drug development.

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

4.6
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