Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Virology, June 2007, p. 6643-6651, Vol. 81, No. 12
0022-538X/07/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JVI.02268-06
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Department of Pathology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, 92093,1 Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, GeneTeam of the McDonald Foundation of the Department of Pediatrics, and Comprehensive Drug Research Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida 331362
Received 16 October 2006/ Accepted 26 March 2007
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
HIV type 1 (HIV-1) populations isolated from the genital tract in both men and women have been reported as compartmentalized (12, 29, 43, 45, 47, 48, 65, 73) when compared to the viruses isolated from the blood or lymphoid tissue. Since the most common route of HIV transmission worldwide is genital exposure (52), the study of HIV populations replicating in the genital tract will help us develop strategies to prevent transmission. Several studies reported that the rate of transmission via genital exposure is related to the plasma viral load and the CD4+ cell count in the source, as well as to the stage of the infection (21, 49, 71), suggesting a role for the immune system in the transmission and evolution of HIV populations replicating in the genital tract. Moreover, differences in divergence and variability of the sequences (15), pattern of drug resistance (58), and coreceptor usage (29) have been reported for viruses isolated from the genital tract compared to those obtained from the bloodstream.
Different tissues in the central nervous system (CNS) can harbor distinct viral populations (1, 8, 20, 27, 32, 35, 38, 41, 42, 46, 51, 54, 57, 61, 62, 63, 64, 68, 69, 70). Samples of viral populations are collected either by examining brain tissue from infected individuals post mortem or by drawing samples from the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in HIV-positive patients. The CNS offers a unique environment for HIV replication, because the presence of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and the blood-CSF barrier restricts viral trafficking between the bloodstream and the CNS, giving rise to at least two segregated HIV populations. In addition, antiretroviral drugs have different levels of permeability through the BBB and the blood-CSF barrier that largely depend on their biochemical characteristics, including lipo-solubility and molecular weight (16). For example, some nucleoside analogs can cross the BBB and hamper the replication of HIV in the CNS, whereas protease inhibitors are pumped out by P-glycoproteins present in the BBB (30) and their ability to reach the viruses replicating in the CNS may be impaired. However, in both cases suboptimal inhibitor concentrations are attained. Furthermore, because the immune response in the CNS includes microglial and T cells as well as macrophage/monocytes (31, 72), changes in cellular tropism of the virus from CCR5 to CRCX4 receptors can confer a selective advantage. Such shifts in receptor usage have been correlated with the rise of neurovirulent viruses in the CNS and development of AIDS-dementia complex (4, 13, 35, 51, 62, 68).
Regrettably, analytical methods used to evaluate the degree of compartmentalization among viral populations lack consistency in rigor and selection of procedure across studies. In some cases, the mere observation that sequences obtained from the same compartment clustered together in a phylogenetic tree has been interpreted as evidence of compartmentalization, whereas others have relied upon more formal statistical approaches, such as the Slatkin-Maddison (SM) test (60). To our knowledge, there has been no attempt to compare the performance of different methods available for testing compartmentalization in HIV sequences and to investigate when and to what degree the methods agree. In this study we examined published HIV sequences isolated from different compartments within the same patient, focusing on sequences derived from the CNS and the female genital tract, and used six previously published methods to detect compartmentalization. For the purposes of our study we divided the methods in two categories: those which used a phylogenetic tree to detect compartmentalization (tree based) and those based on pairwise genetic distances between viral clones (distance based). Based upon 92 biological data sets obtained from GenBank and 1,500 simulated data sets, we concluded that tree-based methods were more sensitive in detecting compartmentalization than distance-based methods. However, to guard against false positives due to the uncertainty in phylogenetic reconstruction, distance-based methods should also be taken into account.
|
|
|---|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Sequences used for comparing compartmentalization detection methods
|
Female genital tract data. A total of 584 sequences (median of 7 and range of 5 to 11 sequences per patient per compartment) derived from 18 patients (29, 43, 48) were grouped in a total of 30 data sets by the source patient and the gene sequenced. Fourteen women included in this study were clinically asymptomatic, in 14 cases the infection risk was genital exposure, and 4 subjects had been treated with antiretrovirals.
Data analyses. We utilized three tree-based methods and three distance-based methods, briefly described below.
(i) Slatkin-Maddison test. The SM test (tree based) (60) determines the minimum number of migration events between the separated populations consistent with the structure of the reconstructed phylogenetic tree. Statistical support is based on the number of migration events that would be expected in a randomly structured population, derived by permuting sequences between compartments.
(ii) Simmonds association index. The Simmonds association index (AI; tree based) (70) assesses the degree of population structure in the phylogenetic tree by weighting the contribution of each internal node based on its depth in the tree (progressively less for nodes near the root) and evaluating the significance of the observed value using a bootstrap sample both over the structure of the population and the shape of the phylogenetic tree.
(iii) Correlation coefficients. Correlation coefficients (r, rb; tree based) (11) are a way to correlate distances between two sequences in a phylogenetic tree with the information about whether or not they were isolated from the same compartment. The distance between two sequences can be either the number of tree branches separating the sequences (rb) or the cumulative genetic distance between the sequences (r). To assess whether the computed coefficient was statistically significant, we estimated the distribution of these coefficients by permuting sequences between compartments. A P value of 0.05 or less was considered statistically significant.
(iv) Wright's measure of population subdivision. Wright's measure of population subdivision (FST; distance based) (24, 25, 59) compares the mean pairwise genetic distance between two sequences sampled from different compartments to the mean distance between sequences sampled from the same compartment. Statistical significance is derived via a population-structure randomization test. We calculated this score using three different approaches, two estimates of FST (25, 59) and an estimate of KST (24), and did not observe any differences in the statistical significance of the results. For our analyses, the distance matrices were calculated using the TN93 genetic distance (66).
(v) Nearest-neighbor statistic. The nearest-neighbor statistic (Snn; distance based) (26) is a measure of how often the nearest neighbors of each sequence were isolated from the same or different compartments. The distance between sequences is measured using the TN93 metric (66) (not the number of sites in which two sequences differ, as in the original description).
(vi) AMOVA. Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA; distance based) (18) calculates an association based on the genetic diversity of the sequences between and within compartments. AMOVA is an extension of Wright's F statistics, in which the distances are restricted to Euclidean and the variability is calculated from the sum of the squared distances between the sequences.
SM, AI, FST, Snn, and correlation indices tests were reimplemented and run using HyPhy (33). AMOVA was carried out using the package ADE4 (67).
Simulations. Using sequence data simulated with Serial Simcoal (3, 17), we studied the effects of the migration rate and the sample size on the abilities of the methods to detect compartmentalization. Based on two subpopulations with an effective population size of 5,000 each and 15 migration rates ranging from 0.00005 to 0.1 migrations per generation, we drew a random sample of 20 sequences per compartment. One hundred replicates were simulated for a given value of the migration rate. We also ran a series of simulations with the migration rate fixed at 0.0005 migrations per generation and set the sample size at 5, 10, 20, and 50 sequences, with 100 replicates for a fixed sample size. In addition, we ran simulations with a fixed migration rate of 0.0005 migrations per generation drawing a sample of 5 sequences from one compartment and 20 from the other. As a control, we simulated 100 data sets evolved over random trees using the program Seq-Gen (50). The sequences were generated using the substitution model HKY85 (23), equal nucleotide frequencies, and a transition/transversion ratio of 2. These data sets consisted of 40 sequences of 500 nucleotides in length, which were equally divided randomly between two compartments.
Comparisons between methods.
In order to quantify the level of agreement obtained with the different approaches used in this study, we calculated the
score (10) for each pair of methods. Briefly, if two procedures are used independently to produce a dichotomous (yes/no) classification of N observations, then
= (p0 – pe)/(1 – pe), where p0 is the proportion of times the methods agree and pe estimates the probability that the two independent methods agree by chance. If fyy is the proportion of N cases which both tests rate as "yes," fnn is the proportion of those which both methods rate as "no," and fyn/fny is the proportion of discordant tests, then p0 = fyy + fnn and pe = (fyy + fyn)(fyy + fny) + (fnn + fny)(fnn + fyn).
ranges between –1 and 1, with positive values indicating more agreement than expected by chance. We used a simple qualitative scale (2) to interpret the level of agreement:
< 0.2, poor; 0.2
< 0.4, fair; 0.4
< 0.6, moderate; 0.6
< 0.8, good; 0.8
1.0, excellent.
|
|
|---|
Tree-based versus distance-based methods.
For the 62 CNS data sets, SM and FST classified 38 data sets as compartmentalized and 14 as noncompartmentalized. Hence, the SM test and FST were in good agreement, based on the
score of 0.62. When applied to the female genital tract data, both methods agreed in 22/30 cases, finding compartmentalization in 18 data sets and rejecting compartmentalization for 4 data sets. The
statistic value of 0.35 indicated fair agreement. When the results from the SM analysis were compared to those obtained with AMOVA, we found poor agreement between the methods. The
score for the SM test and AMOVA in the CNS was 0.09, and in the genital tract it was 0.14. Meanwhile, the AI and FST comparison yielded
scores of 0.56 (CNS, moderate agreement) and 0.29 (genital tract, fair). For the CNS data, the degrees of agreement between SM or AI and Snn were similar to those between SM or AI and FST. However, for the female genital tract data, Snn had higher levels of agreement with the tree-based methods than the other distance methods.
The
scores for each pair of methods are shown in Table 2. In general, when comparing methods from different classes, the level of agreement was poor to fair for the female genital tract data sets. However, for the Snn distance-based method, the level of agreement was moderate. For the CNS data sets, the level of agreement was fair to good when comparing tree-based methods against FST or Snn and poor to fair when comparing against AMOVA.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. Levels of agreement between methods as measured by pairwise scores
|
= 0.48). For the genital tract samples, both methods classified 22 data sets as compartmentalized and only 3 as noncompartmentalized (
= 0.44).
Second, we compared distance-based FST and Snn and found that they agreed on 51 of the CNS data sets and on 26 of the female genital tract data sets. These results indicate moderate agreement for the CNS (
= 0.48) and fair agreement for the female genital tract (
= 0.35). When we compared FST and AMOVA, we found poor agreement between the two methods. In the CNS, both methods agreed that 9 of the cases were classified as compartmentalized and 16 were not, yielding a
score of 0.03. For the genital tract, six cases were concordantly classified as compartmentalized and nine as not compartmentalized (
= 0.11). Similar poor results were obtained between Snn and AMOVA, with
values of 0.05 for the CNS and 0.14 for the female genital tract.
The poor agreement observed for FST and Snn when compared with AMOVA can be attributed to the propensity of the AMOVA test to reject compartmentalization (80 of all the analyzed data sets), which in turn raised the level of disagreement with FST and Snn. This phenomenon of observer bias (9) is known to lower
scores. AMOVA may lack power to detect compartmentalization when the level of sequence divergence is low, as was the case in many of the test cases analyzed here.
Effect of branch lengths.
One possible cause for disagreement between tree-based and distance-based methods is that the former ignore branch length information when computing compartmentalization scores. SM treats the topology as given, and AI performs bootstrapping to incorporate the uncertainty in tree topology, but the actual scoring does not incorporate branch lengths. This can be misleading, because short interior branches cannot be unequivocally resolved and have a low degree of phylogenetic support and, when not taken into consideration, can lead to the overestimation of the topological distance (i.e., the degree of segregation) between the sequences. To investigate possible effects of short branch lengths, we calculated two coefficients which correlated the ordinal variable measuring whether or not two sequences are from the same compartment with either the genetic distance between them in the tree, r, or the number of branches separating the sequences in the tree, rb (11). We found that r and rb were in good agreement when used to classify sequences as compartmentalized (
= 0.67 for CNS and
= 0.66 for genital tract), suggesting that the inclusion of branch lengths does not systematically alter the classification.
Despite broad agreement between the correlation coefficients, in certain "difficult" cases, when other classifications strongly disagreed, we found discordance between r and rb (Table 3), suggesting that inclusion of branch lengths can have a strong effect on the conclusions of compartmentalization analyses in certain situations.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 3. Examples of different results obtained with correlation coefficients r and rb and with SM and FSTa
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 4. Examples of the effect of recombination on compartmentalization detectiona
|
![]() View larger version (19K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Compartmentalization on the simulated data sets. The graphic shows the proportion of data sets classified as compartmentalized plotted against the migration rate (migration events per generation) used to run the simulation. The curve corresponding to each method is specified in the figure.
|
Second, we examined the effect of sample size for a fixed migration rate of 0.0005 migrations per generation. Predictably, larger sample sizes increased the detection power of all methods. For example, replicates with 50 sequences per compartment were consistently classified as compartmentalized by all the methods, whereas those with 20 sequences were correctly classified only by tree-based methods and, lastly, samples with 5 sequences could not be consistently classified by any method (results not shown).
Finally, we evaluated the effect of having very different sample sizes for each compartment by running simulations of two subpopulations at a fixed migration rate of 0.0005 migrations per generation and drawing a sample of 5 sequences from one compartment and 20 from the other. One hundred replicates were run, and the results were compared with those obtained in the simulations where the sample size in both compartments was the same (20 sequences). As shown in Table 5, the proportion of samples classified as compartmentalized by all the methods is lower when the sample sizes are very different compared to the ones observed for equal sample sizes, indicating that the power to detect compartmentalization of all the methods tested can be affected by having skewed sample sizes.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 5. Proportion of simulated data sets classified as compartmentalized when equal and different sample sizes are drawn from the compartmentsa
|
|
|
|---|
When samples from multiple organs or tissues are available, it is useful to investigate whether the viral population is structured and, if this is the case, whether compartment-specific evolutionary pressures contribute to viral diversity and divergent evolution within the host. Reliable detection of viral compartmentalization is nontrivial. Compartmentalization can be transient, and at certain points during infection the virus may be more likely to migrate between the compartments, e.g., when the viral load increases dramatically in one of the compartments, increasing the chances of migration to other compartments. Possible temporal fluctuation in the degree of compartmentalization can introduce sampling bias and confound our ability to detect population structure. For example, disease progression and sampling time can both have a strong effect on the structure of sampled populations. In addition, because it is easier to isolate viruses when the viral load is high, viral samples may be biased toward time points in which the compartmentalization signal is weakened.
Our analyses of two distinct samples of viral sequences, one coming from the CNS, including brain tissues of primarily late-stage disease or fatal cases, and the other from the genital tract of asymptomatic or stable cases, revealed surprising similarities between the distributions of compartmentalized and noncompartmentalized patients. The majority of women in the female genital tract cohort did not show lesions or inflammation in the genital tract, whereas most of the patients from whom the CNS data were obtained showed symptoms of neurological impairment, as well as neuropathology (inflammation). Hence, compartmentalization of HIV populations is not necessarily confined to any specific stage of disease. Furthermore, compartmentalization also may not be related to increased pathogenicity of viruses in a particular compartment, since compartmentalization was detected in patients with no lesions (genital tract) or at an advanced stage of pathogenesis (patients that developed neuro-AIDS). However, it should be noted that some suggestive correlations, e.g., between compartmentalization of HIV sequences in the CNS and dementia (57, 62), have been reported. While it is intuitive to consider that adaptation of HIV to replicate more efficiently in the CNS may be responsible for neurovirulence and that adaptive mutations are more likely to reach high frequencies within a compartmentalized subpopulation, it is yet to be established that the correlation between compartmentalization and dementia is present in a significant number of cases. Additionally, a sampling bias towards patients with clinical neuropathological symptoms may influence such correlational studies.
There is no reason to believe that tissue-specific adaptations in HIV are limited to the CNS. For example, a difference in transmission rates through genital exposure between men and women has been documented (37), a potential effect of viral evolution specific to the male and female genital tracts that includes factors such as virus load of donor and cell and tissue type of recipient. Differences in the patterns of drug resistance in viruses localized in the genital tract and circulating in the blood have also been reported (12). Hence it is possible that certain compartments can act as reservoirs for drug-resistant viruses, especially if optimal concentrations of drugs cannot be attained in those compartments. Suboptimal pharmacokinetics have been reported for both the female genital tract (58) and the CNS (4, 61, 69). Well-documented differences between viruses sampled from different compartments reinforce the need for more comprehensive analyses of within-host viral populations.
Given the difficulty and cost of obtaining representative viral clones from multiple organs and tissues, it is imperative to select the best available methods for subsequent molecular studies. Presently, there is no accepted "gold standard" for detecting compartmentalization in viral populations; hence, the need for a rigorous comparison between cited methodologies is obvious. When fundamentally different approaches arrive at the same conclusion, we may be more confident in the results. Our results showed that different methods to detect compartmentalization frequently disagree. In order to justify giving preference to the conclusions of one method or class of methods, we benchmarked them on a set of simulated sequence alignments. Overall, we found that the sensitivity of the methods fell as the rate of migration between two compartments increased. For a fixed migration rate, up to a certain threshold (in the case of our simulated data this threshold is 0.0007 migrations per generation, but this is not necessarily related to actual migration rates), methods based on examining the shape of the phylogenetic tree (the SM test and AI) had more power to detect compartmentalization than the methods based solely on pairwise genetic distances between sequences (FST and AMOVA). However, tree-based methods can be sensitive to topological uncertainty or recombination and place too much weight on phylogenetic segregation achieved via poorly supported short interior branches. Phylogenies constructed from within-host viral samples are often poorly resolved, and choosing a particular branching order may overestimate the extent of phylogenetic separation.
Small sample size can also adversely affect power to detect compartmentalization. For instance, when we analyzed simulated data with five sequences per compartment, all methods performed poorly. Consequently, we argue that more than five sequences per compartment are needed to gain any confidence in the results and, therefore, future studies should aim to exceed this threshold. Based our simulation results, we consider 20 sequences per compartment to be an adequate sample size, at least for sequences with a level of diversity and length similar to those included in this study. It is also important to analyze similar numbers of clones from each compartment, because highly skewed samples can reduce power and accuracy of the methods. As the techniques for isolating viral clones and sequencing improve and more sequences per compartments are routinely included in molecular studies, we expect that uncertainty due to small sample sizes will become less common.
Finally, the strategy employed to obtain clonal sequences is critically important. In most previous studies, sequence samples were gathered by isolating the genetic material from a tissue sample, performing PCR, and sequencing multiple clones. In two cases (27, 43), limiting dilution PCR was used, whereby one clone from each PCR was sequenced. Other authors (20, 57, 64) reported pooling multiple PCR products before cloning and sequencing. To what extent the sample is representative of the viral diversity will clearly be affected by the number of independent PCRs and the procedures used for clone selection. For instance, if several samples are taken from the compartment but only one sequence from each aliquot is obtained, the most prevalent sequence is likely to be detected repeatedly without adding new information about the lower-frequency viruses present in the population. On the other hand, if multiple clones are extracted from a sample, we can gain more knowledge in the diversity of the viral population infecting a specific compartment. Ideally, longitudinal samples are preferable so that a dynamic picture of the compartmentalization status of a patient can be resolved. A universally accepted procedure for sampling a viral population does not exist, and we shall not endeavor to propose one, apart from the general recommendation that one has to choose a sampling method that is best suited to a particular problem and to weigh these requirements against the cost and the amount of work needed to obtain the most appropriate samples.
We examined the level of agreement between methods using the standard
statistic. In general, we found that all methods had better pairwise agreement on simulated data than they did on biological samples. This finding was not unexpected, since simulated data sets were generated under the same simple model of structured populations, whereas within-host evolution is likely to be much more complex and variable between patients. The length and level of diversity of the sequences obtained are likely to play a role in the ability to detect compartmentalization. Interestingly, the CNS data sets had in general lower diversity and shorter length than the female genital tract data, and the levels of agreement of the methods were in general higher for the CNS. However, there was no correlation between diversity and the classification of any specific data set as compartmentalized (data not shown). Tree-based and distance-based methods were more congruent with methods from the same class than with those from the other class. The exception to this observation is Snn; while this method behaved similarly to FST when applied to the CNS data sets, the results obtained with the female genital tract and the simulated data indicated that it was more sensitive than FST and had a power similar to that of tree-based SM, consistent with the previous suggestion that Snn is a more powerful statistic than other FST metrics (26). However, small sample size combined with high diversity can affect its performance.
Even though distance-based methods appeared to be less sensitive, positive compartmentalization results based on pairwise distance alone reflect substantial accumulation of compartment-specific mutations in different subpopulations. In many cases, however, a few point mutations can drastically alter viral phenotype, for instance, conferring resistance to fusion (36) or to nucleoside (28, 55) and nonnucleoside (40) reverse transcriptase inhibitors. If the populations are segregated by only a few key mutations, fixed in one of the populations, there may be insufficient signal for distance-based methods to detect compartmentalization, but because such mutations can result in complete phylogenetic segregation of samples from different compartments, tree-based methods are able to detect population structure with confidence.
Other methods to detect segregation and differentiation between two subpopulations exist and have been employed in the study of population dynamics of various organisms. For instance, MIGRATE (5, 7) can be used to infer population parameters such as effective population size and migration rates, while LAMARC (6) can also incorporate recombination. In this study we focused on the analysis of those methods that have been applied to the study of intrapatient compartmentalization of HIV, but a further investigation of alternative techniques may prove fruitful.
In summary, we observed that many published samples that were reported as compartmentalized or not compartmentalized might have been classified differently using an alternative method. In light of this finding, we espouse a method consensus approach, where all available tools are used to classify a given sample. When discordant results are obtained, further analysis, or additional sampling, may be recommended. Screening for recombination and evaluating different substitution models can also help to discern some of the contradictions. If a reliable phylogenetic tree (with well-supported internal branches) can be inferred for an entire sample, then tree-based methods such as the SM test or association index appear to be preferable to distance-based methods (FST and AMOVA), due to better power to detect stabilizing selection within compartments. The combined use of different methods will result in a more reliable determination of intrapatient viral compartmentalization status, which is required for a better understanding of virus infection dynamics and pathogenesis as well as molecular epidemiology.
Published ahead of print on 11 April 2007. ![]()
|
|
|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»