4.6 Article

The V1, V2, and V3 regions of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 envelope differentially affect the viral phenotype in an isolate-dependent manner

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 79, 期 14, 页码 9069-9080

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.79.14.9069-9080.2005

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [R56 AI047708, R01 AI041945, AI47708, R01 AI047708, R37 AI041945, AI41945] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is well documented that removal of the V1V2 region or of the V2 loop alone from the envelope glycoprotein of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) or simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) increases the susceptibility of these viruses to neutralization by antibodies. The specific role of the V1 loop in defining the neutralization susceptibility of HIV is, however, not well documented. Our current studies indicate that although the V1V2 region is a global modulator of the HIV-1 neutralization susceptibility, the individual roles the V1 and V2 loops have in defining the neutralization susceptibility profile of HIV-1 differ and in some cases are opposite. While deletion of the V2 loop renders the virus more susceptible to neutralization by antibodies that recognize diverse epitopes, in particular certain ones located in the CD4 binding site and the V3 loop, deletion of the V1 loop renders the virus refractory to neutralization, especially by antibodies that recognize CD4-induced epitopes and certain CD4-site binding antibodies. Our current studies also indicate that the relative involvement of the V2 loop of the HIV-1 envelope during virus-cell entry appears to be envelope background dependent. As a result, although deletion of the V2 loop from the clade B, R5-tropic SF162 HIV-1 virus resulted in a virus that was replication competent, the same modification introduced on the background of two other R5-tropic isolates, SF128A (clade B) or SF170 (clade A), abrogated the ability of these envelopes to mediate virus-cell entry.

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