Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Virology, July 2004, p. 6908-6914, Vol. 78, No. 13
0022-538X/04/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JVI.78.13.6908-6914.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90033
Received 6 January 2004/ Accepted 23 February 2004
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
In addition to the four promoters, the transcription of the HBV genome is also regulated by two enhancer elements known as EN1 and EN2 (21). A number of transcription factors, including nuclear receptors, regulate the activities of HBV promoters and enhancers. There are three known nuclear receptor binding sites in the viral genome: one in the EN1 enhancer (5, 10), one in the EN2 enhancer (8), and one in the core promoter (3, 16, 23). The nuclear receptor binding site in the core promoter is recognized by COUP-TF1, COUP-TF2, the PPAR
-RXR
heterodimer, testicular receptor 2 (TR2), testicular receptor 4 (TR4), and the liver-enriched transcription factor HNF4 (3, 14, 16, 22). These nuclear receptors exhibit different effects on the core promoter activities. For example, COUP-TF1, COUP-TF2, TR2, and TR4 can suppress the expression of the precore RNA or both the precore RNA and the core RNA (14, 24), and PPAR
-RXR
and HNF4 can enhance the expression of both precore and core RNAs (16, 17, 24). As the precore RNA and the core RNA possess very different biological functions, differential regulation of the core promoter activities by these nuclear receptors may have profound effects on HBV replication and pathogenesis.
A natural double mutation is frequently detected in the nuclear receptor binding site of the core promoter. This double mutation, which invariably changes nucleotide (nt) 1765 from A to T and nt 1767 from G to A (Fig. 1), suppresses the precore RNA transcription and modestly increases the viral replication rate (2, 3, 7, 17, 19). This double mutant is frequently isolated from HBV patients with chronic hepatitis symptoms (1). Recent studies indicate that this double mutation abolishes the binding of COUP-TFs, PPAR
-RXR
, and TR4 to the core promoter without affecting the binding by HNF4 (3, 19, 22). Interestingly, this double mutation also creates a binding site for the liver-enriched transcription factor HNF1 (11, 19). Since the core promoter overlaps with the X protein coding sequence in the HBV genome, this double mutation also changes two codons in the X protein coding sequence (Fig. 1). Our recent studies indicate that the mutated X protein can physically and functionally interact with HNF1 to regulate the core promoter activity (13).
![]() View larger version (21K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. HBV core promoter sequences of various mutants. The core promoter (CP) and the transcription initiation sites of precore and core RNAs are illustrated. Part of the core promoter sequences of WT, M1, M4, and M5 are compared. The amino acid sequence of the X protein is also shown. The boldface letters highlight the locations of nucleotide and amino acid mutations.
|
|
|
|---|
Cell line and DNA transfection. Huh7 cells were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 10% fetal bovine serum. Cells in a 60-mm-diameter petri dish were grown to 80% confluence and transfected with a total of 10 µg of DNA by the calcium phosphate precipitation method. Forty-eight hours after transfection, the incubation medium was harvested and analyzed for hGH by using a radioimmunoassay kit (Nichols Diagnostics). Cells were then lysed for RNA isolation.
Primer extension analysis.
Total cellular RNA was isolated with Trizol reagent (Invitrogen) following the manufacturer's protocol. Ten micrograms of total RNA was used for each primer extension analysis. The oligonucleotide primer used for analyzing HBV precore and core RNA transcripts was 5'GGTGAGCAATGCTCAGGAGACTCTAAGG3'. This sequence is an antisense sequence corresponding to nt 2052 to 2025 of the HBV genome. The oligonucleotide primer used for analyzing the hGH RNA transcript was 5'GCCACTGCAGCTAGGTGAGCGTCC3'. The primer, in the amount of 20 pmol, was labeled with 300 µCi of [
-32P]-ATP (ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) and 2 µl (5 units/µl) of T4 polynucleotide kinase (Promega) in a 20-µl reaction volume at 37°C for 1 h. The 32P-labeled primer was then purified on a 5% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel. The primer extension analysis was carried out by using previously described procedures (11). The signals on the autoradiographs were analyzed and quantified by SigmaScan Pro5. All the experiments were repeated multiple times, and the results presented here represent the averages of those experiments.
EMSA. Both pCMV-HNF4S and pCMV-HNF4AS were linearized with the restriction enzyme XhoI and used for RNA synthesis in vitro by using the T7 RNA polymerase. Approximately 0.5 µg of RNA thus synthesized was used for in vitro translation in a final volume of 10 µl by using the rabbit reticulate lysates (Promega). These translation mixtures were then used for the electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA). The sequences of the oligonucleotide probes used for EMSA were as follows: M1, 5' GAGGAGATTAGGTTAATGATCTTTGTATT 3' and 3' CTCTAATCCAATTACTAGAAACATAATC 5'; M4, 5' GAGGAGATTAGATTAAAGGTCTTTGTATT 3' and 3' CTCTAATCTAATTTCCAGAAACATAATC 5'; and M5, 5' GAGGAGATTAGGTTGATGATCTTTGTAT 3' and 3' CTCTAATCCAACTACTAGAAACATAATC 5'.
The differences in these nucleotide sequences are highlighted in Fig. 1. These oligonucleotides were labeled with 32P by using T4 kinase and purified as described above. For EMSA, 1 µl of the translation mixture derived from either pCMV-HNF4S or pCMV-HNF4As was mixed with 1 µl of poly(dI-dC) (1 µg/µl), 1 µl of salmon sperm DNA (1 µg/µl), and 4 µl of 5x Stephan's buffer (2) in a final volume of 19 µl and incubated on ice for 10 min. One microliter (approximately 104 cpm) of the DNA probe was then added into each reaction mixture, which was further incubated on ice for 20 min. The translation mixture derived from the antisense construct pCMV-HNF4AS served as a negative control in this experiment. The samples were then subjected to electrophoresis at 4°C on a 5% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel as previously described (2). For the competition assay, the nonlabeled oligonucleotide competitor was added during the incubation on ice prior to the addition of the WT DNA probe. The sequences of the nonspecific competitor used in the assay were 5'-TGTTTAAGGACGGGGAGGAGATGGGGG-3' and 3'-AATTCCTGCCCCTCCTCTACCCCCTCC-5'.
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (53K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Effects of HNF4 on the HBV core promoter. Huh7 cells were cotransfected with 4 µg of pWTD (the WT HBV genome) (lanes 1 to 3) or pM1D (the double-mutant genome) (lanes 4 to 6) and various concentrations of the HNF4 expression plasmid pLEN45. Two micrograms of pXGH5 was also included in the cotransfection experiment to monitor the transfection efficiencies (see Materials and Methods for details). Lanes 1 and 4, no pLEN45 was used for the cotransfection; lanes 2 and 5, 2 µg of pLEN45 was used; and lanes 3 and 6, 4 µg of pLEN45 was used. The control vector pLEN0 was used to bring the total amount of DNA to 10 µg for transfection. The locations of the precore RNA, the core RNA, and the hGH RNA are indicated with arrows. The quantification was conducted by use of SigmaScan Pro5. The intensities of the precore and the core RNA bands were normalized against the hGH RNA internal control. The numbers shown represent the precore RNA and the core RNA levels relative to those without the coexpression of HNF4. The experiments were repeated three times, and the results shown represent the averages ± standard errors of those experiments. Note that the intensities of the RNA signals can only be compared within one set of experiments but not between different sets of experiments, due to the differences in the specific activity of the 32P-labeled primers used in different primer extension experiments.
|
![]() View larger version (78K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. EMSA for HNF4. (A) HNF4 was synthesized in vitro by using rabbit reticulocyte lysates and its sense RNA (lane 1) or antisense RNA (lane 2). The location of the HNF4 protein band is indicated by an arrow. (B) M1 (lanes 1 to 3), M4 (lanes 4 to 6), and M5 (lanes 7 to 9) DNA probes were used for the EMSA. Lanes 1, 4, and 7, free DNA probes; lanes 2, 5, and 8, the DNA probes were incubated with the translation mixture containing the HNF4 sense RNA; lanes 3, 6, and 9, the DNA probes were incubated with the translation mixture containing the antisense HNF4 RNA. The arrow indicates the location of the HNF4 band shift. (C) Competition assay. The EMSA was performed by using the WT DNA probe in the absence (lane 1) or presence of 1:1 (lanes 2, 5, 8, 11, and 14), 1:10 (lanes 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15), or 1:100 (lanes 4, 7, 10, 13, and 16) nonlabeled competitor, indicated above the gel. NS, nonspecific competitor (see Materials and Methods).
|
![]() View larger version (75K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. Primer extension analysis of the precore RNA and the core RNA expressed from M4 and M5 DNA constructs. Huh7 cells were transfected with 4 µg of pM4D (lanes 1 to 3), pM4DX (lanes 4 to 6), pM5D (lanes 7 to 9), or pM5DX (lanes 10 to 12) HBV genomic DNA construct together with an increasing concentration of the HNF4 expression plasmid pLEN45 (18). Two micrograms of pXGH5 was also used for cotransfection to monitor the transfection efficiency. Lanes 1, 4, 7, and 10, no pLEN45 was used for cotransfection; lanes 2, 5, 8, and 11, 2 µg of pLEN45 was used; and lanes 3, 6, 9, and 12, 4 µg of pLEN45 was used. In these experiments, the control vector pLEN0 was used to bring the total amount of DNA used for the transfection to 10 µg. The results were quantified by SigmaScan Pro5 and normalized against the hGH RNA internal control as described in the legend to Fig. 2.
|
Effects of HNF1 on the core promoter of WT and mutant HBV. As the M1 core promoter also contains an HNF1 binding site, we examined the possible role of HNF1 in the regulation of the M1 core promoter activities. To this end, the M1 genome was cotransfected with an HNF1 expression plasmid into Huh7 cells. The precore RNA and the core RNA levels were again analyzed by primer extension. The WT genome was also used in a parallel study to serve as a control. As shown in Fig. 5, the precore RNA and the core RNA levels of the WT genome were not significantly affected by HNF1. In contrast, HNF1 reduced in a dose-dependent manner the precore RNA level of the M1 double mutant to approximately 30% and in the meantime slightly increased its core RNA level. This observation indicates that HNF1 plays a negative role in the precore RNA expression. Furthermore, this effect of HNF1 apparently requires the HNF1 binding site located in the core promoter of the M1 genome, since the WT genome, which lacks this HNF1 site, did not respond to HNF1.
![]() View larger version (51K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. Effects of HNF1 on the HBV core promoter. Huh7 cells were cotransfected with 4 µg of pWTD (lanes 1 to 3) or pM1D (lanes 4 to 6) HBV genome and various concentrations of the HNF1 expression plasmid pCMV-HNF1. Two micrograms of pXGH5 was also included in the cotransfection experiment to monitor the transfection efficiencies. Lanes 1 and 4, no pCMV-HNF1 was used for the cotransfection; lanes 2 and 5, 2 µg of pCMV-HNF1 was used; lanes 3 and 6, 4 µg of pCMV-HNF1 was used. The control vector pRc/CMV was used to bring the total amount of DNA to 10 µg for transfection. The locations of the precore RNA, the core RNA and the hGH RNA are indicated with arrows. The quantification was conducted as described in the legend to Fig. 2. The experiments were repeated at least three times and the results shown represent the averages ± standard errors of the experiments.
|
![]() View larger version (59K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 6. Effects of HNF1 on the HBV core promoter in the absence of the X protein. The experiments were conducted as described in the legend to Fig. 5 except that pWTDX (lanes 1 to 3) and pM1DX (lanes 4 to 6) genomic constructs were used for the transfection studies. Lanes 1 and 4, no pCMV-HNF1 was used for the cotransfection; lanes 2 and 5, 2 µg of pCMV-HNF1 was used; lanes 3 and 6, 4 µg of pCMV-HNF1 was used. The control vector pRc/CMV was used to bring the total amount of DNA to 10 µg for transfection. The locations of the precore RNA, the core RNA, and the hGH RNA are indicated with arrows.
|
![]() View larger version (60K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 7. Effects of the X protein on the HBV core promoter activities. HBV genomic constructs pWTD (lanes 1 and 2), pM1D (lanes 3 and 4), pM5D (lanes 5 and 6), and pM4D (lanes 7 and 8), with and without the ability to express the X protein were transfected into Huh7 cells. Forty-eight hours after transfection, cells were lysed for RNA isolation. The HBV precore and core RNAs were analyzed by primer extension as described in Materials and Methods. + and indicate X-positive and X-negative genomes, respectively. Arrows indicate the locations of the precore RNA, the core RNA, and the hGH RNA bands. Quantification of the precore RNA and the core RNA signals was conducted as described in the legend to Fig. 2.
|
|
|
|---|
-RXR
, and TR4 without affecting the binding by HNF4 (19). This double mutation also creates an HNF1 binding site and changes two codons in the overlapping X protein coding sequence. Thus, the suppressive effect on the precore RNA expression by this double mutation may be due to HNF4, HNF1, and/or the X protein. In this report, we have studied the possible effects of HNF1, HNF4, and the X protein on the core promoter activities. Our results indicate that HNF4 could stimulate the expression of the precore RNA and the core RNA from both the WT and the M1 double-mutant genomes, although its effect on the core promoter of the M1 genome was less prominent (Fig. 2). The HNF4 binding site in the core promoter is apparently not needed for the transactivation effect of HNF4, since the M5 core promoter, which lacks the HNF4 binding site, was also stimulated by HNF4 (Fig. 4). It is conceivable that HNF4 stimulates the core promoter through its binding site in the EN1 enhancer and/or the EN2 enhancer. Indeed, Yu and Mertz had previously reported that HNF4 could stimulate the core promoter via its binding site in the EN1 enhancer (24). In contrast to the positive effect of HNF4, HNF1 suppressed the precore RNA expression from the M1 double-mutant core promoter and marginally increased the core RNA level (Fig. 5). The suppressive effect of HNF1 is apparently mediated by its binding site in the M1 core promoter, as HNF1 has no effect on the WT core promoter, which lacks the HNF1 binding site. Raney et al. (17) previously suggested that HNF4 binding to the nuclear receptor binding site of the M1 double mutant might limit the precore RNA synthesis. Based on the results of the present study, however, it is apparent that it is not HNF4 but HNF1 that is responsible for this suppression of the precore RNA synthesis. The suppressive effect of HNF1 on the precore RNA does not require the X protein, since abolishing the expression of the X protein did not abolish this suppressive effect (Fig. 6). Note that HNF1 did not completely abolish the expression of the precore RNA, which accounts for the low expression level of the e antigen by the M1 double mutant (1, 2, 19).
To investigate the role of the X protein in the regulation of the core promoter activities and to understand how it may interact with HNF1 and HNF4, we have studied the expression of precore and core RNAs from WT, M1, M4, and M5 genomic constructs, with and without the ability to express the X protein. Our results indicate that abolishing the expression of the X protein reduced the core promoter activity of only the M1 genomic construct (Fig. 7). This observed reduction of the M1 core promoter activity is consistent with a previous finding (13), which indicated that the X protein could interact with HNF1 physically and functionally to activate the M1 core promoter. The lack of effects of the X protein on WT, M4, and M5 core promoters indicates that the HNF1 binding site in the core promoter is required for the X protein to stimulate the core promoter activities.
In agreement with a previous report (11), the M4 genome expressed approximately two times more precore RNA and core RNA than did the M5 genome (Fig. 7). It had been previously postulated that this might be due to the M5 X protein (11), which differs from the M4 X protein by two amino acids due to the double mutation (Fig. 1). However, since the M4X genome still expressed approximately two times more precore and core RNAs than did the M5X genome, it does not appear likely that the mutated X protein was responsible for the reduction of the M5 core promoter activities. It is likely that the difference in their core promoter activities is due to the difference in their abilities to bind to nuclear receptors.
In conclusion, our results demonstrate that HNF4 can activate the WT precore and core RNA expression. It can also activate the M1 precore and core RNA expression, although the activation on the M1 precore RNA expression by HNF4 is antagonized by HNF1. The X protein does not affect the ratio of the M1 precore RNA and the core RNA, but it can increase the absolute amount of both RNAs. This three-way interaction on the regulation of the M1 core promoter leads to the specific suppression of the precore RNA expression, which we believe then alters the course of replication and pathogenesis of HBV in chronically infected patients.
This research was supported by a research grant from the National Institutes of Health.
|
|
|---|
T, A(1762)
T and G(1764)
A mutations in the core promoter. J. Gen. Virol. 79:375-380.[Abstract]
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»