Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Virology, July 2003, p. 7174-7181, Vol. 77, No. 13
0022-538X/03/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JVI.77.13.7174-7181.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Center for Blood Research, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115,1 Center for Cancer Research,2 Department of Biology and McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 021393
Received 21 January 2003/ Accepted 4 April 2003
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
The advantage of using siRNA as a potential antiviral tool is that it is effective at concentrations that are several orders of magnitude lower than that required for other RNA-based antiviral gene therapies, such as antisense RNA or ribozymes (4, 10). However, the silencing effect of siRNAs in actively replicating cells peaks around 96 h but tapers off thereafter and is lost by 7 days (26, 33, 34). Because most studies have used actively dividing cell lines for siRNA studies, it is generally presumed that the siRNA effect is transient because of its dilution with cell division. However, whether siRNA can stably suppress gene expression in nondividing cells has not been tested. Terminally differentiated macrophages offer an ideal cell type with which to test this possibility. Macrophages constitute a significant reservoir for HIV-1 (23) and, being relatively immune to the cytopathic effects of HIV-1, survive for long periods after infection (2).
Previous studies of siRNA-directed protection against HIV-1 have generally targeted viral genes to suppress HIV-1 (6, 8, 13, 14, 17, 26). In an earlier study, we achieved viral suppression by targeting the cellular CD4 receptor (26). However, CD4 targeting may not be a feasible therapeutic approach because of its importance in immune function. On the other hand, CCR5, the major HIV-1 coreceptor for viral entry into macrophages, may be a potentially useful cellular target (16) since a 32-bp homozygous deletion of the gene, which abolishes its function, has no deleterious immunological consequences (25) but provides protection from HIV-1 infection (19).
In the present study, we aimed to achieve sustained and synergistic siRNA-mediated inhibition of HIV-1 replication in monocyte-derived macrophages (MDMs) by silencing the genes for cellular CCR5 and viral p24.
|
|
|---|
Preparation of siRNAs. All siRNAs, including the Cy5-labeled p24 siRNA, were synthesized at Dharmacon Research, Lafayette, Colo. The sequences of the sense and antisense strands of siRNAs were as follows: CCR5, 5'-P.CUCUGCUUCGGUGUCGAAAdTdT-3' (sense) and 5'-P.UUUCGACACCGAAGCAGAGdTdT-3' (antisense); p24, 5'-P.GAUUGUACUGAGAGACAGGCU-3' (sense) and 5'-P.CCUGUCUCUCUCAGUACAAUCUU-3' (antisense); green fluorescent protein (GFP), 5'-P.GGCUACGUCCAGGAGCGCACC-3' (sense) and 5'-P.UGCGCUCCUGGACGUAGCCUU-3' (antisense).
RNAs were deprotected and annealed in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
Transfection of siRNAs. Adherent macrophages were generated by seeding peripheral blood mononuclear cells at 2 x 106/well in 24-well plates. Before transfection, the cells were washed and resuspended in 900 µl of RPMI 1640 medium. Cationic lipid complexes, prepared by incubating 1 µM siRNA duplexes with 3 µl of oligofectamine (Gibco-Invitrogen, Rockville, Md.) in 100 µl of RPMI 1640 medium, were added to the wells. The cells were washed after overnight incubation and resuspended in RPMI 1640 medium with serum for further experiments.
Flow cytometry. To test CCR5 expression and HIV-1 infection, adherent MDMs were trypsinized at the times indicated and stained with biotin-conjugated CCR5 antibody (R&D Systems, Inc., Minneapolis, Minn.), followed by avidin-labeled streptavidin-phycoerythrin (BD Pharmingen, San Diego, Calif.). Where indicated, the cells were permeabilized with the Caltag Laboratories (Burlingame, Calif.) Fix and Perm kit and stained with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-labeled p24 monoclonal antibody (Beckman Coulter, Brea, Calif.). Cells were analyzed by flow cytometry on a FACScalibur instrument with CellQuest software (Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lakes, N.J.).
HIV-1 infection. MDMs were infected with the R5 BAL strain of HIV-1 by using 50 ng of p24gag antigen per well. At the times indicated, HIV-1 replication in infected macrophages was evaluated by flow cytometric analysis of p24 expression. Cell-free viral production was measured by p24 antigen enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) of supernatants with the Alliance HIV-1 p24 ELISA kit (Perkin-Elmer Life Science Inc., Boston, Mass.).
In situ hybridization. Infected macrophages cultured in slide chambers were evaluated for HIV-1 mRNA expression by using the ViroTect HIV-1 Cell Detection System (Invirion Inc., Frankfurt, Mich.). Cells were fixed, permeabilized, and hybridized with an FITC-labeled gag-pol oligonucleotide probe cocktail as described in the manufacturer's protocol. The cells were stained with Texas red-X phalloidin (Molecular Probes Inc., Eugene, Oreg.) and analyzed by epifluorescence microscopy. The fluorochromes were independently recorded at excitation wavelengths of 494 and 591 nm.
Reverse transcription PCR
(RT-PCR).
Total RNA was
extracted from macrophage cultures at the times indicated with an
RNeasy Mini Kit (QIAGEN Inc., Valencia, Calif.), and cDNA was
synthesized with a TaqMan reverse transcription kit (Applied
Biosystems, Foster City, Calif.). Aliquots of cDNA were PCR amplified
for CCR5 with the primers
5'-ATGGATTATCAAGTGTCAAGTCC-3' and
5'-CCAGAATTGATACTGACTGTATGG-3' and
for
-actin with the primers
5'-TCTGTCAGGGTTGGAAAGTC-3' and
5'-AAATGCAAACCGCTTCCAAC-3'.
Amplified PCR products were visualized on 1.2%
agarose gels.
Modified Northern blot
assay.
Total cellular RNA
was extracted with Trizol reagent in accordance with the
manufacturer's protocol (Invitrogen Life Technologies, Carlsbad,
Calif.). After precipitation, the RNA pellets were washed in 70%
ethanol, air dried, resuspended in nuclease-free H2O, and
quantitated by UV absorption. Three micrograms of total RNA was loaded
onto a Tris-borate-EDTA-15% urea gel and
electrophoresed at 10 W. The gel was electrotransferred to Nytran Plus
(Schleicher & Schuell, Inc., Keene, N.H.) for 2.5 h, UV
cross-linked at 1,200 µF, and prehybridized for 30 min at
40°C in UltraHyb buffer (Ambion). One hundred picomoles of the
sense strand of CCR5 or p24 siRNA was end labeled with
[
-32P]ATP (150 µCi). The labeled
probe was purified on a G-25 MicroSpin Column (Amersham), heated to
65°C for 5 min, added to the prehybridization buffer, and
hybridized overnight. Blots were washed at room temperature (2
x 5 min in 2x SSC [1x SSC is 0.15 M NaCl
plus 0.015 M sodium citrate]-0.1% sodium dodecyl
sulfate and 3 x 10 min in 0.1x SSC-0.1%
sodium dodecyl sulfate) and analyzed on a phosphorimager (Molecular
Dynamics, Carlsbad,
Calif.).
|
|
|---|
90%; data not shown). The siRNA was not taken up
efficiently by nonspecific phagocytosis because, in the absence of
oligofectamine, <6% of the MDMs were
Cy5+ (Fig.
1).
![]() View larger version (20K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Efficient
delivery of duplex siRNA into macrophages. MDMs were mock transfected
or exposed to Cy5-labeled p24 siRNA in the presence or absence of
transfection reagent. After 24 h of culture, the cells were
removed by trypsinization, stained with anti-CD14-FITC, and
analyzed by flow cytometry. The percentage of Cy5+
cells is indicated in each
panel.
|
![]() View larger version (34K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. CCR5
and p24 siRNAs inhibit HIVBAL infection in MDMs. (a) MDMs
were transfected with the indicated doses of CCR5 ( ) or p24
( ) siRNA and infected 2 days later with HIVBAL.
Cell-free virus production was measured on day 7 postinfection by p24
ELISA. (b) MDMs were either mock transfected ( ) or transfected
with the GFP ( ), p24 ( ), or CCR5 (x) siRNA or
with the p24 and CCR5 siRNAs (*) and infected after 2 days with
HIVBAL, and virus production was measured by p24 ELISA at
the indicated times postinfection. (c) The siRNA-transfected cells
described in panel b were stained with anti-p24-FITC 15 days
after infection and examined by flow cytometry. The percentage of
p24+ cells is shown in each panel. (d)
siRNA-transfected and HIVBAL-infected MDMs were probed for
HIV-1 RNA by in situ hybridization with a fluorescein-labeled HIV-1
gag-pol oligonucleotide probe cocktail 7 days after infection.
Fluorescence microscopy (magnification, x200) was used to
evaluate fluorescence signals for HIV-1 RNA (bottom). At the top are
the same cells counterstained with Texas red-X
phalloidin.
|
-32P-labeled sense strands of CCR5 or p24
siRNA as probes. To quantitate siRNAs, lanes were also loaded with
titrated concentrations of single-stranded antisense siRNA. Small RNA
species with the relative mobility of 20- to 23-bp oligonucleotides
were visualized at a 10-fmol level of sensitivity (Fig.
3a) The hybridization signals for CCR5 and p24 were similar in intensity on
day 1. However, by day 7, the p24 signal became weaker and was
completely lost by day 15, whereas the CCR5 signal remained robust
throughout. No signal was detected in mock-transfected samples used as
controls. These results suggested that p24 siRNA may be relatively
short-lived in the absence of infection, while CCR5 siRNA persists
under these conditions. Stability of CCR5 siRNA-mediated gene silencing
was also assessed by parallel flow cytometric analysis of endogenous
CCR5 expression over time. Compared to mock-transfected cells, CCR5
siRNA-transfected cells maintained a uniform 70 to 80% reduction
in the mean fluorescence intensity of CCR5 staining from 1 to 20 days
after transfection (Fig.
3b). Moreover, CCR5 mRNA
was undetectable by RT-PCR analysis on days 1, 4, 7, and 15 after CCR5
siRNA transfection (Fig.
3c).
![]() View larger version (49K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. CCR5,
but not p24, siRNA persists in uninfected MDMs. (a) Modified Northern
blot analysis showing levels of internalized CCR5 and p24 siRNAs in
MDMs on the indicated days after transfection. Before loading, samples
were normalized for total RNA content. The sense strand of each siRNA
was end labeled with -32P and used as a probe.
Lanes loaded with graded amounts of the antisense strand of siRNA and
mock-transfected samples served as positive and negative controls,
respectively. (b) CCR5 (top) and GFP (bottom) siRNA-transfected MDMs
were examined for CCR5 expression over time. Overlay histograms of
CCR5-stained mock-transfected (open solid line), control
immunoglobulin-stained (open dotted line), and siRNA-transfected
(filled) cells are shown. (c) RT-PCR for CCR5 and -actin mRNA
expression was performed with mock-transfected (lanes 2 to 5) and CCR5
siRNA-transfected (lanes 6 to 9) cells on days 1 (lanes 2 and 6), 4
(lanes 3 and 7), 7 (lanes 4 and 8), and 15 (lanes 5 and 9) after
transfection (M, molecular weight marker; lane 1, negative control).
CCR5 mRNA was not detected, even after an additional 25 cycles of PCR
amplification (data not
shown).
|
![]() View larger version (36K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. CCR5,
but not p24, siRNA confers sustained and uniform protection when MDMs
are infected at increasing intervals after transfection. MDMs were
transfected with GFP (top), p24 (middle), or CCR5 (bottom) siRNA and
infected with HIVBAL at the indicated times after
transfection. Cells were analyzed 10 days postinfection for p24
expression by flow cytometry. The percentage of p24+
cells is shown in each
panel.
|
![]() View larger version (38K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. p24,
but not CCR5, siRNA suppresses HIV-1 replication in an established
infection. (a) MDMs infected with HIVBAL for 16 days
(>90% of the MDMs were p24+; data not
shown) were transfected with CCR5 siRNA and examined for p24 expression
3 days later. The percentage of p24+ cells is shown
in each panel. (b) MDMs infected for 16 days were transfected with p24
or control siRNA and examined for p24 expression on various days
posttransfection.
|
|
|
|---|
Macrophages represent a key target of HIV-1 in vivo. Although the absolute number of infected macrophages is relatively low compared to that of CD4 T cells, the unique dynamics of HIV-1 replication in these cells make them a formidable viral reservoir (2). Macrophages are relatively immune to the cytopathic effects of HIV-1 and can survive for long periods after infection. They replicate large amounts of virus in sequestered cytoplasmic vacuoles, with a plateau of virus production lasting as long as 60 days (1). They are also the primary targets of HIV-1 in the nervous system (2). HIV-1-infected macrophages are commonly found in the blood and tissues of seropositive patients receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy (32), suggesting that virus production in macrophages may not be effectively controlled by currently available antiviral therapy. Thus, it is significant that this recalcitrant cell type is particularly amenable to sustained siRNA-mediated viral inhibition.
Why is the siRNA effect sustained in macrophages? Previous studies in which actively dividing cells were used to demonstrate siRNA-mediated gene silencing have found that the effect in mammalian cells is transient, lasting for only 4 to 7 days (7, 26, 33, 34). This has been attributed to siRNA dilution with cell division. However, even in nondividing macrophages, Northern blot analysis revealed that CCR5, but not p24, siRNA was stably present for a prolonged period after transfection. p24 siRNA persisted for only up to 7 days after transfection in uninfected cells, suggesting that siRNA degradation may contribute to loss of siRNA. Consistent with the lack of sustenance of p24 siRNA in uninfected MDMs, the level of viral inhibition declined significantly when the interval between transfection and infection was prolonged beyond 7 days. While p24 siRNA appears to be rapidly degraded in uninfected cells, it effectively suppressed viral replication for prolonged periods in previously infected cells (Fig. 5b), where target mRNA is continually synthesized. These results suggest that the presence or absence of target mRNA may determine whether siRNA is sustained or degraded. Moreover, CCR5 siRNA was able to suppress the expression of the endogenous CCR5 gene, as well as prevent viral entry for long periods, even when transfection preceded infection by 15 days (Fig. 4). Thus, continued presence of target RNA may be required for intracellular sustenance of siRNAs. These results are also consistent with the finding, in Caenorhabditis elegans, that RNAi directed against GFP did not result in detectable siRNA unless the gene for GFP was simultaneously expressed in the target cells (27). However, although this finding would imply that the antisense strand of the siRNA would be preferentially maintained in the cells, no bias toward longer persistence or higher concentration of the antisense strand relative to the sense strand of CCR5 siRNA was observed in modified Northern blot analysis (data not shown).
Another mechanism that can extend the effectiveness of siRNA is its amplification. In lower species, such as C. elegans, it is well documented that siRNAs can prime target mRNA to generate new siRNAs by using an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (15). Whether siRNA amplification occurs in mammalian cells is unclear, and no direct evidence of RNA-dependent RNA polymerase activity exists (7 29a). Moreover, the silencing effect of siRNA rapidly fades in dividing mammalian cell lines, even in the presence of target mRNAs (10, 30, 33). These issues underscore the need to elucidate the fundamental mechanisms of RNAi in mammalian cells. Nondividing MDMs may provide an ideal cell type for such mechanistic studies because of the absence of complicating dilutional effects.
Only one of the two siRNA sequences that we used in our initial screening was effective at silencing CCR5 expression in primary macrophages (data not shown). Similar results have been reported in a recent study by Qin et al., who used two sequences distinct from the ones that we used and found that only one of them was highly effective at ablating CCR5 expression in primary CD4 T cells (29). Surprisingly, the siRNA that we found to be completely ineffective at silencing CCR5 expression in MDMs is identical in sequence to the one used by Martinez et al. for silencing CCR5 expression in the U87-CD4-CCR5 cell line in a recent study (20). However, in agreement with their data, we also observed a significant decrease in CCR5 expression in the U87-CD4-CCR5 cell line transfected with the same siRNA (data not shown). This brings up the intriguing possibility of cell type-specific differences in effectiveness of siRNAs and underscores the importance of testing their effectiveness in primary CD4 T cells and macrophages, which are the physiologically relevant targets of HIV-1.
Given the high mutation rate of HIV-1, it may be desirable to target highly conserved regions of the viral genome and to use combinations of siRNAs. In this regard, host cellular gene targets that can interrupt the HIV-1 life cycle may offer particularly attractive targets because endogenous genes are not under immune pressure to generate escape mutations. CCR5 is a feasible target since homozygous mutations of the gene are well tolerated and reduce susceptibility to infection (19, 25). Combinations of siRNAs targeting two different steps in the viral life cycle had a strong synergistic antiviral effect. Combined treatment with the CCR5 and p24 siRNAs completely eliminated HIV-1 replication in macrophages, probably by interrupting two steps in the viral life cycle, with CCR5 siRNA blocking viral entry and p24 siRNA destroying the virus that slipped through other coreceptors, or by passive uptake (24). Thus, it may be possible to develop optimal RNAi-based therapeutic strategies that target multiple aspects of the virus life cycle akin to drug cocktails used in highly active antiretroviral therapy.
Efficient in vivo delivery of siRNAs into CD4 T cells and macrophages remains the major bottleneck in gene therapeutic approaches to HIV-1. Viral vectors capable of generating siRNA under the control of an RNA polymerase III promoter have been used effectively in cell lines (3, 5, 32a). Qin et al. have demonstrated the feasibility of using a lentivirus-based vector to introduce siRNAs against the HIV-1 coreceptor CCR5 into primary cells (29). However, the use of these vector systems in vivo is fraught with potential dangers of retroviral recombination and malignant transformation due to random insertion within the host genome. Two out of nine children receiving retroviral gene therapy for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency developed a leukemia-like disease in a recent clinical trial (12). In this regard, synthetic siRNA administration may be preferable if it can provide reasonably long-lasting protection, as appears to be the case for macrophages. However, efficient in vivo delivery methods need to be developed. In fact, several groups, including ours, have successfully administered duplex siRNAs systemically to mice (4, 18, 21, 31). Given the rapid strides being made in the field, the use of siRNA as an antiviral therapeutic approach in humans appears to be promising.
We thank Z. Xu and V. François-Borgarçon for technical assistance. The R5 BAL strain of HIV-1 was provided by S. Gartner, M. Popovic, and R. Gallo and was obtained through the AIDS Research and Reference Reagent Program, Division of AIDS, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health.
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grants AI49792, AI45306 (P.S.), AI46566 (N.M.), and AI42519 (J.L.), R37-GM34277 (P.A.S.), and F32-AI10523 (C.N.), NCI grant PO1-42063 (P.A.S.), and amfAR fellowship grant 70589-32RF (S.-K.L.).
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»