4.5 Article

Increased CXCR4-dependent HIV-1 fusion in activated T cells: role of CD4/CXCR4 association

期刊

JOURNAL OF LEUKOCYTE BIOLOGY
卷 78, 期 6, 页码 1306-1317

出版社

FEDERATION AMER SOC EXP BIOL
DOI: 10.1189/jlb.0105043

关键词

chemokine receptors; cell activation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Activation of peripheral CD4(+) T cells resulted in augmented fusion with X4 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) envelope-expressing cells without parallel increases in the surface expression of CD4 or CXC chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4). Our study used biochemical methods and biological assays to correlate the increased fusion potential of activated T cells with changes in CXCR4 isoforms and CD4-CXCR4 association. Western blot analyses of CXCR4, precipitated from resting T cells, identified several CXCR4 species with molecular weights of 47, 50, 62, and 98 kDa. After 24 h stimulation with phytohemagglutinin/interleukin-2, a marked reduction was seen in the 47-kDa, with a concomitant increase in the amounts of 50 and 62-64 kDa CXCR4. T cell activation also induced an increase in the coprecipitation of CXCR4 with CD4. The 62-kDa CXCR4 predominantly coprecipitated with CD4 and was shown to be ubiquitinated. Stripping of CD4 from the cell surface with pronase treatment prior to cell lysis only partially reduced coprecipitation of CD4 with the 62-kDa CXCR4, revealing a pool of intracellular CD4-CXCR4 complexes. Coprecipitation of CXCR4 with CD4 was reduced in activated cells treated with Brefeldin A and Monensin, suggesting that late endosomes play a role in intracellular association of CXCR4 with CD4. Confocal microscopy confirmed the colocalization of CD4 and CXCR4 within CD63(+) endocytic compartments. These findings demonstrated a correlation between the enhanced susceptibility of activated T cells to HIV-1 fusion and accumulation of ubiquitinated 62-64 kDa CXCR4 species, which preferentially associated with CD4. The CD4-CXCR4 complexes may shuttle between late endosomes and the cell surface.

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

4.5
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