Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Virology, January 2009, p. 940-952, Vol. 83, No. 2
0022-538X/09/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JVI.01520-08
Copyright © 2009, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Myles H. Thaler Center for AIDS and Human Retrovirus Research and the Department of Microbiology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22908
Received 18 July 2008/ Accepted 23 October 2008
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
9-kb RNA genome (16). The virus uses a variety of strategies in order to optimize the utilization of the coding capacity of its genome (44). Alternative splicing gives rise to many different mRNAs that can be categorized into three distinct classes: unspliced, singly spliced, and multiply spliced RNA (58). The unspliced and singly spliced mRNAs retain introns. Normally, intron-containing RNAs are retained in the nucleus of the host cell (8, 67). However, HIV-1 has evolved a specific mechanism to overcome this problem, utilizing the Rev regulatory protein in conjunction with a structured cis-acting RNA element known as the Rev response element (RRE) (for a review, see reference 22). Rev is a small RNA-binding phosphoprotein encoded by a multiply spliced viral RNA (27). Rev localizes to the nucleus, where it binds the RRE and recruits the Crm1 nuclear export factor to help overcome nuclear retention (14, 15, 23, 28, 33, 47). An alternative mechanism to overcome nuclear retention of mRNA with retained introns relies entirely on cellular proteins in conjunction with a structured RNA element first identified in Mason-Pfizer Monkey Virus (MPMV), known as the constitutive transport element (CTE) (4, 13). The CTE functions together with the cellular Tap/Nxf1 and Nxt1 proteins to overcome nuclear retention and enable export of mRNA with retained introns (20, 21). In addition to nuclear export, the proteins also enhance translation from CTE-containing RNAs (30). Experiments using leptomycin B, a Crm1-specific inhibitor, demonstrated that Tap/Nxf1-mediated nuclear export is Crm1 independent (53). Thus, the Rev/RRE and CTE represent two different trafficking pathways for export. However, despite this, the CTE can functionally replace Rev/RRE during HIV-1 replication (4, 79).
Current therapeutic strategies mainly use highly active antiretroviral therapy to control HIV-1 infection, typically using a triple-drug cocktail targeting reverse transcription and proteolytic processing (49, 56). In spite of the successes using highly active antiretroviral therapy, drug resistance remains a problem, requiring changes in drugs and treatment strategies. All currently approved drugs for HIV-1 treatment target proteins in order to prevent replication. Another avenue for controlling HIV-1 infection would be to target the viral RNA during replication. Although promising, no therapies targeting the HIV-1 viral RNA have been approved for wide clinical use.
Several approaches are currently being considered to target RNA directly, including the use of ribozymes, small interfering RNA (siRNA), and vector-delivered antisense RNA (11, 63). Ribozymes are catalytically active RNAs that recognize and cleave specific sequences within a target RNA. Several ribozyme-based strategies targeting HIV-1 sequences are in development, but none have achieved complete inhibition of HIV-1 replication (18, 32, 59, 72, 76). siRNA has been used successfully in the laboratory for a decade and is currently being tested as a viable therapeutic. Binding of siRNA to complementary mRNA leads to translation inhibition or degradation (10, 41, 48, 75). A drawback to the approaches outlined above is that they rely on short complementary sequences for inhibition. Resistance to siRNA has already been demonstrated, although the use of longer sequences has demonstrated greater tolerance for sequence changes (2, 34, 66). As a result of these problems, multiple combined RNA-targeting strategies have been suggested as essential (63).
VIRxSYS has recently developed a lentivirus-based antisense RNA therapeutic to prevent HIV-1 replication (42) that has shown promise in a phase I clinical trial and is currently undergoing phase II testing (39). The vector delivering the antisense RNA is an HIV-1 vector, where the antisense RNA is expressed from an HIV-1 long terminal repeat (LTR) promoter. The RNA that is expressed includes a 937-nucleotide (nt) sequence from the env region of HIV-1 in an antisense orientation, as well as an RRE. A previous study demonstrated that HIV-1 was unable to easily develop resistance to inhibition by this RNA (42). However, after long-term passage of HIV-1 in antisense-expressing cells, virus particles were recovered. RNAs recovered from these particles were shown to contain multiple mutations in the env target region, making the virus noninfectious. Most of these mutations were A-to-G changes in the RNA, consistent with previous editing of the RNA through "adenosine deaminase that acts on RNA" (ADAR) activity (1). ADAR deaminates adenosines to inosine, which would be recognized by reverse transcriptase as guanosine, leading to subsequent A-to-G mutations in the genome. RNAs containing multiple inosines are typically retained in the nucleus and degraded (36, 57). Thus, the finding of multiple mutations in HIV-1 RNA, as a possible result of editing by ADAR, was an unexpected finding. However, previous work by Zhang and Carmichael (78), using a Xenopus oocyte model system, has demonstrated that hyperedited RNA containing an RRE was exported to the cytoplasm, efficiently overcoming nuclear retention, if Rev was provided. Together, these results suggest the possibility that Rev/RRE trafficking contributes to the observed efficiency of the antisense RNA approach.
In the present study, we specifically examine whether efficient inhibition of HIV-1 requires the antisense RNA to be trafficked through the Rev/RRE pathway. To do this, we constructed HIV-1-based plasmids that express antisense RNA containing either an RRE, CTE, or no transport element. The effect of expression of these RNAs on HIV-1 expression was then examined in experiments that include studies on the effects of antisense RNA on target RNA trafficking and expression.
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (33K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Construction and expression of HIV-1-derived antisense plasmids. (A) Schematic of antisense RNA plasmids. The plasmids contain the 5' and 3' LTRs, a splice donor (SD) and acceptor (SA), a 937-bp portion of HIV-1 env (nt 6602 to 7538) in the sense or antisense orientation, the RRE or the MPMV CTE. The restriction enzyme sites utilized for construction with their pNL4-3 nucleotide coordinates are indicated below each construct. Stop codons were inserted between the gag and env sequence to prevent Env expression. (B) Northern blot analysis of antisense RNA. A total of 107 293T cells were transfected with 5 µg of antisense vector, 500 ng of pCMV-Rev (pHR30), and 500 ng of pCMV-Tat (pHR136). Also, 5 µg of pCMV-β-globin (pHR2643) was cotransfected as a normalization control. At 48 h posttransfection, total RNA was harvested, oligo(dT) selected, and analyzed by Northern blotting. Specific radiolabeled DNA probes were used to detect β-globin and antisense RNAs. Blots were analyzed by using a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager and ImageQuant software. The panel shows representative lanes from the Northern blot that was used to determine RNA expression levels. (C) Quantitation of antisense level. The antisense signal was normalized to the β-globin signal to control for recovery. Three independent samples were analyzed, and the standard deviation is shown. AS, antisense.
|
Proviral clones and other plasmids used in the present study. All of the pNL4-3-derived proviruses that were used here contained either one or two point mutations in the Rev ORF (an AUG mutation and a nonsense mutation at Rev amino acid 12) that prevent Rev expression. pNL4-3(Rev–) (pHR1146) contains a functional RRE with the nonsense mutation in place of amino acid 12 (4). pNL4-3 (Rev–)(RRE–)(CTE) (pHR1371) contains multiple third-base mutations in the RRE that prevent its function but has the MPMV CTE cloned into nef. In some experiments an HXB2-derived provirus containing mutations in the myristylation site, frameshift region, and protease active site (pHR1320) was utilized. This was obtained from Casey Morrow (University of Alabama) (54). CMV-Rev (pHR30), CMV-Tat (pHR136), CMV-RevM10Tap (pHR2155), and CMV-Nxt1 (pHR2415), which express Rev, Tat, RevM10-Tap fusion protein, and Nxt1, respectively, have been described previously (21, 69). pCMV (pHR16) is the empty backbone vector for these expression constructs. The CMV-β-globin construct (pHR2643) expressing mouse β-globin RNA was obtained from Lynne Maquat (University of Rochester) (77). Further details about all of the proviral clones and plasmids used in the present study are available upon request.
The LTR-driven GFP construct was created by digesting pEGFP-N1 (Clontech, pHR1976) with HindIII and NotI. A fragment containing the EGFP ORF was then cloned into pBluescript that had also been digested with HindIII and NotI, resulting in pBS-GFP (pHR3753). To generate pLTR-GFP (pHR3754), a fragment that contained the HIV-1 5' LTR was then inserted into pBS-GFP. This was done by first digesting pNL4-3 (pHR1145) with PstI, followed by repair with T4 DNA polymerase and further digestion with HindIII to obtain the LTR fragment. pBS-GFP was then digested with ClaI, repaired with T4 DNA polymerase, and then further digested with HindIII. This facilitated the cloning of the LTR fragment directly between the blunt ended ClaI site and the HindIII site of pBS-GFP.
Cell lines and transfections. 293T/17 cells were maintained in Iscove minimal essential medium supplemented with 10% bovine calf serum and 0.1% gentamicin. Transient transfections were performed by using the calcium phosphate method (19). For analysis of RNA stability, cells were treated with 5 µg of actinomycin D (Sigma, St. Louis, MO)/ml for 0, 3, or 6 h (40), followed by the harvest of total RNA using TriReagent (Molecular Research Center, Cincinnati, OH) according to the manufacturer's instructions.
p24 ELISA. Supernatants from transfected cells were collected 48 h after transfection and diluted 100- to 1,000-fold before application to the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) plate. The ELISA was performed using a p24 monoclonal antibody (catalog no. 1513) and pooled human anti-HIV-1 immunoglobulin G (catalog no. 3957) that were obtained from the AIDS Research and Reference Reagent Program, following a protocol developed by Bruce Chesebro (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Rocky Mountain Laboratories) (73).
RNA fractionation, polyribosome analysis, and Northern blot analysis.
Methods for cytoplasmic RNA extraction, poly(A) mRNA selection, and Northern analysis have been described previously (23, 24). Total RNA was extracted by using TriReagent according to the manufacturer's instructions. Polyribosome analysis was performed as described in detail by Bor et al. (3). Specific radiolabeled DNA probes to detect GagPol and antisense RNA were generated by PCR incorporating [
-32P]dCTP (Perkin-Elmer Life Sciences, Boston, MA). The probe template was derived from the pNL4-3 gag region and recognizes an
500-bp sequence that is present in the 5' portion of both the GagPol viral RNA and the antisense RNA. The probe used to detect mouse β-globin mRNA was generated by PCR incorporating [
-32P]dCTP, using a template corresponding to exon 3 of the β-globin mRNA. Visualization and quantitation was performed by using a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager and ImageQuant software.
Western blot analysis. Proteins were separated by using sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)-8% polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (acrylamide-bisacrylamide, 37.5:1), and Western blot analysis was performed essentially as previously described (23). Proteins were transferred to Immobilon-FL membrane by electrotransfer and blocked using 5% milk in phosphate-buffered saline. Mouse monoclonal antibodies were used to detect Pr160 (catalog no. 1513; AIDS Research and Reference Reagent Program) and Nef (provided by Bernhard Meier) (43). A commercial polyclonal antibody to human β-tubulin (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) was used detect cellular β-tubulin as a loading control. After incubation with secondary antibody (IRDye800 anti-mouse or Alexa Fluor 680 anti-rabbit antibodies; Rockland Immunochemicals, Gilbertsville, PA), blots were visualized by using the Odyssey Infrared Imaging System (Li-Cor Biosciences, Lincoln, NE) and analyzed by using the Odyssey software package.
|
|
|---|
We first compared the level of RNA expression from the three different antisense plasmids in the absence of an HIV-1 target. To do this, 293T cells were transfected in triplicate with the antisense constructs containing no element, the CTE, or the RRE together with CMV promoter-driven plasmids expressing the HIV-1 Tat and Rev proteins. Tat protein is essential for high expression from the HIV-1 LTR promoter, and Rev was provided to ensure good expression from the plasmid containing the RRE. A CMV-β-globin plasmid was also cotransfected to serve as a normalization control. After 48 h, total RNA was harvested, and poly(A)+ RNA was analyzed on Northern blots (Fig. 1B). The experiment was performed in triplicate. Quantitation of the blots, with normalization to the β-globin signal, demonstrated that the no-element construct and the RRE-containing antisense RNA were expressed at similar levels, while the levels of the CTE-containing RNA were two- to threefold higher (Fig. 1C).
Inhibition of particle production from pNL4-3-derived proviruses by the antisense constructs. In order to assess the ability of the antisense RNA to inhibit HIV-1 production, we cotransfected 293T cells with a pNL4-3 provirus containing a nonfunctional Rev gene, a plasmid expressing functional Rev (pCMV-Rev), and the indicated amounts of antisense plasmids. This allowed us to determine a dose-response range for antisense inhibition. In this experiment, we used a Rev– provirus and supplied Rev in trans to allow direct comparison with the Rev– provirus containing the CTE that was used as a target in later experiments. Virus production was measured by analyzing the levels of p24 in the medium supernatants of the transfected cells at 48 h posttransfection. The experiment was performed in triplicate.
As shown in Fig. 2A (where levels of p24 are shown relative to control cultures in the absence of antisense RNA), the RRE-driven antisense construct efficiently inhibited HIV-1 production even at a very low target/antisense molar ratio (5:1). At a ratio of 5:1 the levels of p24 were only ca. 20% of that in control cultures, at a ratio of 1:1 they were only ca. 3%, and at a ratio of 1:5 they were only ca. 0.3%. In contrast, the CTE-driven antisense did not significantly inhibit particle production from the provirus, even at a 1:5 molar ratio, despite the fact it expressed more antisense RNA per microgram of plasmid (see Fig. 1C). The antisense plasmid with no export element also failed to inhibit particle production. These data indicate that the presence of an RRE in the antisense RNA is essential for efficient antisense inhibition and that the CTE fails to substitute for the RRE.
![]() View larger version (20K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Inhibition of particle production from HIV-1 proviruses by antisense. (A) Inhibition of particle production from an RRE-driven provirus. A total of 106 293T cells were transfected with 5 µg of pNL4-3 provirus containing a nonfunctional Rev gene (pHR1146), 500 ng of pCMV-Rev (pHR30) and increasing amounts of no-element (pHR3478), CTE-driven (pHR3477), or RRE-driven (pHR3476) antisense construct. After 48 h, p24 expression was assayed by ELISA and plotted as the percentage of p24 expression from the provirus alone. The molar ratio of provirus to antisense plasmid and the microgram amount of antisense plasmid is indicated on the x axis. Transfections were performed in triplicate. The p24 level for 100% was 837 ± 31.1 ng/ml. (B) Inhibition of particle production from a Rev-independent CTE-driven provirus. A total of 106 293T cells were transfected with 5 µg of a pNL4-3 provirus containing a nonfunctional RRE and rev gene, and the MPMV CTE was cloned into the nef region (pHR1371), together with 500 ng of pCMV-Rev and increasing amounts of RRE- or CTE-driven antisense construct. In one sample, pCMV was substituted for pCMV-Rev. Transfections, ELISAs, and analyses were performed as in panel A. The p24 level for 100% was 20.8 ± 7.11 ng/ml. (C) Inhibition of particle production from an RRE-driven provirus in the presence of RevM10-Tap and Nxt1. A total of 106 293T cells were transfected with 5 µg of the pNL4-3 proviral clone lacking a functional rev gene (pHR1146), 500 ng of pCMV-RevM10-Tap (pHR2155), 500 ng of pCMV-Nxt1 (pHR2415), and increasing amounts of RRE-driven (pHR3476) or CTE-driven antisense construct (pHR3477). Transfections, ELISAs, and analyses were performed as in panel A. The p24 level for 100% was 145 ± 8.54 ng/ml. AS, antisense.
|
We cotransfected the CTE-containing provirus with different amounts of the RRE-driven antisense plasmid (with or without pCMV-Rev) or with different amounts of CTE-driven antisense plasmid. As before, this experiment was performed in triplicate. As can be seen in Fig. 2B, the CTE-driven antisense was still rather inefficient at inhibiting p24 production, although significant inhibition (ca. 80%) could be seen at higher concentrations (Fig. 2B). This suggests that cotargeting is a factor for the CTE-driven antisense RNA at these higher concentrations, since the antisense RNA would now be expected to traffic along the same pathway as the provirus, in contrast to the experiment depicted in Fig. 2A. However, surprisingly, the RRE-driven antisense was still much more efficient in inhibiting the CTE-driven provirus than was the CTE-antisense RNA, when Rev was supplied (square symbols). This cannot be attributed to cotargeting, since the antisense and target RNA utilized different export pathways. However, antisense inhibition by the RRE-driven antisense was less efficient on the CTE-virus than the effect on the RRE-virus (compare Fig. 2A and B, square symbols), suggesting that cotargeting may also play a role in this case. No significant inhibition of virus production was observed with the RRE-driven antisense when Rev was not supplied (triangle symbols). These results demonstrate that both Rev and the RRE are important for efficient inhibition by the RRE-containing antisense even when the RNA produced from the target provirus does not utilize the Rev pathway.
Previously, we showed that an RRE-containing RNA can be redirected from the Rev pathway to the Tap/Nxf1pathway used by the MPMV CTE when a RevM10-Tap fusion protein in conjunction with the Tap cofactor Nxt1 is utilized in place of Rev (21). The RevM10 protein is a Rev mutant that contains a mutation in the nuclear export signal but maintains the ability to bind to the RRE (46). This allows the RevM10-Tap protein to export the RRE-RNA through the Tap/Nxf1 portion of the protein using the CTE pathway. RevM10-Tap-mediated RNA export is not sensitive to leptomycin B inhibition (21), confirming that it does not use the Crm1 export pathway that is essential in the case of Rev/RRE (15, 74).
To further test the hypothesis that the Rev/RRE pathway is essential for efficient antisense inhibition, we cotransfected the pNL4-3 proviral clone lacking a functional rev gene, plasmids expressing RRE- or CTE-driven antisense, a plasmid expressing the RevM10-Tap fusion protein, and a plasmid expressing the Nxt1 protein. As can be seen in Fig. 2C, this significantly reduced the inhibition that was obtained with RRE antisense, especially at lower antisense/target ratios (compare to Fig. 2A, square symbols). Furthermore, in this experiment the inhibition curves obtained with the CTE- and RRE-driven antisense constructs were virtually overlapping, with inhibition occurring only at the highest ratio of antisense. This result is not unexpected, since both of the antisense RNAs, as well as the target RNA, now use the Tap/Nxf1 pathway. Taken together, these results clearly demonstrate that trafficking of the antisense RNA along the Rev/RRE pathway is essential for efficient antisense inhibition, independent of a cotargeting component that is also a contributor.
Expression of antisense RNA does not prevent cytoplasmic localization of target RNA. We next performed an experiment to determine the localization of the antisense RNA and whether expression of antisense RNA resulted in nuclear retention and/or significant degradation of the proviral target RNA. To do this, we cotransfected the pNL4-3 proviral clone lacking a functional rev gene with pCMV-Rev and the RRE or CTE-driven antisense constructs at a 5:1 molar ratio. At this molar ratio, the RRE-driven antisense inhibits ca. 80% of particle production (see Fig. 2A). As a control, we also performed a similar experiment using an RRE-containing plasmid with the target region in the "sense" orientation, since this RNA does not inhibit particle production. In all of these experiments, a CMV-β-globin plasmid was cotransfected to provide a normalization control. To control for the quality of subcellular fractionation, we also transfected the provirus with or without pCMV-Rev in the absence of sense/antisense constructs. Since the GagPol RNA produced from the provirus requires Rev for export, in the absence of Rev, GagPol RNA would not be expected to be found in the cytoplasmic fractions.
At 65 h posttransfection, total and cytoplasmic RNA was extracted from the transfected cells, oligo(dT) selected, and analyzed by Northern blotting for GagPol, sense/antisense vector, and β-globin RNA. For this analysis, we compared total and cytoplasmic RNA levels in the control cells transfected with the sense RNA vector to the levels of RNA in cells transfected with the antisense vectors. A probe that detected sequences in the GagPol region in HIV-1 that is shared between the provirus and the sense/antisense plasmids was used for the GagPol and sense/antisense plasmids, and a separate probe was also included to detect β-globin RNA (see Materials and Methods). The results from this experiment are shown in Fig. 3.
![]() View larger version (67K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. GagPol and sense or antisense RNA levels from total and cytoplasmic cell fractions. (A) A total of 107 293T cells were transfected with 5 µg of the pNL4-3 proviral clone lacking a functional rev gene (pHR1146), 500 ng of pCMV-Rev (pHR30), and 660 ng of RRE-driven sense (pHR3473) or antisense constructs (pHR3476) at a 5:1 DNA molar ratio of provirus and vector. Also, 5 µg of CMV-β-globin (pHR2643) was cotransfected as a normalization control. (B) 293T cells were transfected as in panel A, but cytoplasmic RNA was harvested, oligo(dT) selected, and analyzed by Northern blotting. (C) Cell fractionation control for total and cytoplasmic Northern analysis. A total of 107 293T cells were transfected with 5 µg of the pNL4-3 proviral clone lacking a functional rev gene (pHR1146), 5 µg of CMV-β-globin (pHR2643), and 500 ng of either pCMV (pHR16) or pCMV-Rev (pHR30) to ensure the quality of cellular fractionation. Total and cytoplasmic RNA was isolated and analyzed as in panels A and B. After 65 h, total RNA was harvested, oligo(dT) selected, and analyzed by Northern blotting. Specific radiolabeled DNA probes were used to detect GagPol, sense or antisense, or β-globin RNA. Blots were analyzed by using a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager and ImageQuant software. For panels A and B, the numbers below each lane indicate the fold expression level of GagPol or antisense RNA relative to their levels in the RRE-driven sense sample after normalization to the β-globin RNA. For panel C, the numbers below each lane indicate the fold expression level relative to their levels in the absence of Rev. Values are the means from three independent experiments.
|
Antisense RNA does not alter the stability of target RNA. To more directly determine whether expression of RRE-driven antisense RNA had any effects on the stability of GagPol RNA and whether antisense RNA was degraded in the presence of target RNA, we cotransfected 293T cells with the pNL4-3 proviral clone lacking a functional rev gene, pCMV-Rev, and RRE-driven antisense plasmid at a 5:1 molar ratio of provirus and antisense vector (which causes an 80% reduction in p24 levels). To be able to compare the fate of sense and antisense RNAs in the presence or absence of target, we also performed a separate experiment in which the same amount of sense or antisense plasmid was cotransfected with only pCMV-Rev and pCMV-Tat. In all cases, a CMV-β-globin plasmid was cotransfected for normalization. After 48 h, the cells were harvested or treated with 5 µg of actinomycin D/ml for 3 or 6 h, to inhibit RNA polymerase II transcription, before harvesting. Total RNA was extracted, and oligo(dT)-selected RNA was prepared and analyzed by Northern blotting (Fig. 4A and C). The GagPol, sense, and antisense RNA levels present in each sample were then quantitated by using ImageQuant software after normalization to β-globin RNA levels (Fig. 4B, D, and E).
![]() View larger version (52K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. Stability of HIV-1 and sense/antisense RNA after actinomycin D treatment. (A) Stability of sense/antisense RNA in the absence of target RNA. A total of 107 293T cells were transfected with 660 ng of RRE-driven sense (pHR3473) or antisense plasmid (pHR3476), 500 ng of pCMV-Rev (pHR30), and 500 ng of pCMV-Tat (pHR136). Also, 5 µg of CMV-β-globin (pHR2643) was cotransfected for a normalization control. Transfections and actinomycin D treatments were performed in duplicate. After 48 h, cells were treated with 50 µg of actinomycin D/ml for 0, 3, or 6 h and then harvested for total RNA. RNA was oligo(dT) selected and analyzed by Northern blotting for sense/antisense and β-globin RNA using specific radiolabeled DNA probes. Blots were visualized by using a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager and ImageQuant software. (B) Quantitation of vector and β-globin RNA levels. RNA levels were quantitated after normalization to β-globin RNA by using ImageQuant software. (C) Stability of GagPol and antisense RNA. A total of 107 293T cells were transfected with 5 µg of the pNL4-3 proviral clone lacking a functional rev gene (pHR1146), 500 ng of pCMV-Rev, and 660 ng of RRE-driven antisense plasmid. Also, 5 µg of CMV-β-globin was cotransfected for a normalization control. After 48 h, cells were treated, harvested and analyzed as in panel A. (D) Quantitation of the antisense RNA level in the presence of target RNA. Antisense and β-globin RNA levels were quantitated as in panel B. (E) Quantitation of GagPol RNA level in the presence of antisense RNA. GagPol and β-globin RNA levels were quantitated as in panel B. AS, antisense.
|
Expression of RRE-antisense RNA inhibits GagPol protein production but does not inhibit expression of Nef. The results from the RNA analysis indicated that the presence of the RRE-driven antisense RNA, which led to a very significant reduction of p24 in the tissue culture supernatant, did not reduce the GagPol mRNA levels in the cytoplasm of transfected cells. Since p24 is expressed from the GagPol RNA, this suggests that RRE-driven antisense RNA either results in the expression of low levels of protein from the GagPol mRNA or interference with later steps in virus particle assembly or release. To distinguish between these two models for antisense inhibition, we used a modified HIV-1 proviral clone (pHR1320), derived from the HIV-1 HXB2 isolate, as a target. This clone contains a glycine-to-alanine myristylation site mutation, a deletion at the GagPol frameshift sites, and an inactivating mutation in the protease active site. The result of these three mutations is that the clone produces a GagPol precursor protein (Pr160) that cannot target to the membrane and is trapped within the cell (54). Since the protein is not processed further, its levels can be easily measured and represent a more direct readout of the GagPol mRNA translation efficiency than the processed p24 protein. The target nucleotide sequence in pNL4-3 and HXB2 are >98% identical, and the antisense constructs inhibit particle production from a wild-type HXB2 proviral clone to the same extent as pNL4-3 targeted by antisense RNA (data not shown).
To examine total GagPol Pr160 production, we cotransfected 293T cells with the mutant HXB2 proviral construct, pCMV-Rev, and the RRE-driven sense or antisense plasmids, using a range of provirus/antisense molar ratios between 50:1 and 1:1. After 48 h, the cells were harvested and lysed, and the extracts were run on SDS-polyacrylamide gels, followed by electrotransfer and Western blotting with antibodies to the p24 CA portion of Pr160 and β-tubulin (to provide a loading control) (Fig. 5A). The blot was then scanned and quantitated by using an Odyssey infrared imaging system, and GagPol Pr160 levels were normalized to β-tubulin. The results are shown in Fig. 5A and B.
![]() View larger version (25K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. GagPol Pr160 and Nef production in the presence of sense or antisense vector. (A) Pr160 production in the presence of RRE-driven sense or antisense vector. A total of 106 293T cells transfected with 5 µg of HXB2-derived provirus (pHR1320), 500 ng of pCMV-Rev (pHR30), and increasing amounts of RRE-driven sense (pHR3473) or antisense constructs (AS, pHR3476). The HXB2 provirus contains a nonfunctional myristylation signal, GagPol frameshift, and protease. Cells were harvested after 48 h, and extracts were run on an 8% polyacrylamide-SDS gel, followed by electrotransfer to Immobilon-FL. Blots were probed with a monoclonal antibody to the p24 CA portion of Pr160 (183-H12-5C) and a commercial polyclonal antibody to β-tubulin (Abcam). The molar ratio of provirus and sense or antisense vector and the microgram amount of sense/AS is indicated above each lane. GagPol Pr160 expression level relative to provirus alone is indicated below each lane. (B) Quantitation of Pr160 production in the presence of RRE-driven sense or antisense vector. Pr160 levels were normalized to cellular β-tubulin by using the Odyssey imaging system. The Pr160 level is expressed as a percentage of Pr160 produced from the provirus alone. (C) HIV-1 Nef production in the presence of CTE- or RRE-driven antisense constructs. A total of 106 293T cells were transfected with 5 µg of the pNL4-3 proviral clone lacking a functional rev gene (pHR1146), 500 ng of pCMV-Rev (pHR30), and increasing amounts of CTE-driven (pHR3477) or RRE-driven antisense construct (pHR3476). Cells were harvested, blotted, and analyzed as described in panel A except that an HIV-1 Nef monoclonal antibody (SN20) was used in place of the p24 monoclonal antibody. (D) Quantitation of Nef production in the presence of CTE- or RRE-driven antisense construct. Nef expression levels were measured as described for Pr160 in panel B. AS, antisense.
|
To exclude the possibility that the reduction of Pr160 levels was the result of nondirect effects of the antisense vectors on the cell, such as interferon induction, we examined the effects of the antisense RNA on the HIV-1 Nef protein. The HIV-1 Nef accessory protein is encoded by a multiply spliced RNA in which the antisense target sequence has been removed by splicing. Thus, the RNA encoding Nef would not be expected to be directly affected by antisense RNA expression, unless the antisense RNA targeted the Nef mRNA precursor in the nucleus prior to splicing.
To determine whether expression of antisense RNA had any effects on Nef protein levels, we cotransfected 293T cells with the pNL4-3 proviral clone lacking a functional rev gene, pCMV-Rev, and increasing amounts of either the RRE or CTE-driven antisense construct. After 48 h the cells were harvested and lysed, and the extracts were separated on SDS-polyacrylamide gels, followed by electrotransfer and Western blotting with antibodies to Nef and β-tubulin (Fig. 5C). The blot was then scanned and quantitated by using the Odyssey infrared imaging system, and Nef levels were normalized to β-tubulin levels. As can be seen in Fig. 5D, Nef protein levels remained constant in the presence of either the CTE- or RRE-driven antisense constructs (Fig. 5D). This result demonstrates that the antisense effect is specific for mRNA that contains the target sequence and speaks against nonspecific effects on protein production or degradation. It also suggests that the antisense RNA does not exert its function on the target RNA prior to splicing.
Polyribosome localization of GagPol and vector RNA. Although our results clearly indicate that the target RNA reaches the cytoplasm, the lack of stable protein expression could indicate that in the presence of antisense RNA, the RNA traffics to a compartment away from the translation machinery, such as P-bodies (55). This would lead to a failure of the RNA to appear in polyribosome complexes. To determine whether the HIV-1 GagPol mRNA localized to polyribosomes in the presence of antisense RNA, we cotransfected 293T cells with the pNL4-3 provirus lacking a functional rev gene, pCMV-Rev, and the RRE-driven sense or antisense plasmids. The provirus and sense or antisense plasmids were transfected at the same 5:1 molar ratio of provirus and vector used in most of our other experiments. After 48 h the cells were harvested for cytoplasmic RNA, and extracts were applied to a sucrose gradient, which was subjected to ultracentrifugation as previously described (3). During fractionation, the gradient was continuously analyzed using a BioComp Gradient Master equipped with a UV monitor, which recorded absorbance at 254 nm. In vitro-transcribed Gag RNA (IVT Gag) was added to each fraction to control for recovery during subsequent analysis. RNA was then isolated from the collected fractions and analyzed by Northern blotting for GagPol, vector, β-globin, and IVT Gag RNA. Northern blots were analyzed and quantitated by using ImageQuant software. The blots are shown in Fig. 6A and B, and the quantitation is shown in Fig. 6E. To confirm that antisense inhibition was effective in this experiment, we also assayed cell supernatants from the cells for particle production. The p24 levels are indicated above the UV traces (Fig. 6A and B). As indicated, p24 levels were 53 ng/ml in the presence of antisense RNA versus 385 ng/ml in the control experiment. Thus, the 84% inhibition observed was consistent with earlier experiments.
![]() View larger version (71K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 6. Polyribosome analysis of GagPol and sense or antisense RNA by sucrose gradient centrifugation. (A and B) A total of 107 293T cells were transfected with 5 µg of the pNL4-3 proviral clone lacking a functional rev gene (pHR1146), 500 ng of pCMV-Rev (pHR30), and 660 ng of RRE-driven sense (pHR3473) (A) or antisense (pHR3476) (B) vector at a 5:1 molar ratio of provirus and vector. Also, 5 µg of CMV-β-globin (pHR2643) was cotransfected as a control. At 48 h posttransfection, cytoplasmic extracts were prepared and separated by centrifugation through a sucrose gradient. Gradients were fractionated while monitoring the UV absorbance at 254 nm. RNA was purified from fractions after the addition of in vitro-transcribed Gag (IVT Gag) RNA for a recovery control. RNA from fractions were analyzed by Northern blotting and probed with specific radiolabeled DNA probes to GagPol, sense/antisense, β-globin, and IVT Gag RNA. Blots were analyzed by using a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager and ImageQuant software. (C and D) Polyribosome analysis of GagPol and sense/antisense RNA after EDTA treatment and sucrose gradient centrifugation. Transfected cells were harvested and processed as described in panels A and B except that prior to sucrose gradient centrifugation, cytoplasmic extracts were treated with 15 mM EDTA. (E) Quantitation of GagPol RNA localization in a sucrose gradient in the presence of sense/antisense RNA. GagPol RNA levels were normalized to IVT Gag and plotted as a percentage of the total GagPol RNA present in the gradient. (F) Quantitation of GagPol RNA localization in a sucrose gradient in the presence of sense/antisense RNA after treatment with 15 mM EDTA. Analysis was carried out as in panel E. AS, antisense.
|
Effect of GFP antisense constructs on expression from an LTR-driven GFP construct. Our results clearly demonstrate that the Rev/RRE pathway is required for efficient antisense inhibition of a target region in HIV-1 env. To determine whether this effect could be extended to non-HIV-1 target regions, we constructed a GFP expression vector that uses the HIV-1 5' LTR as a promoter (see Materials and Methods). This construct does not contain splice sites and is expected to generate only one RNA transcript. In addition, it is not known to contain any additional elements that control RNA splicing or stability.
A portion of the GFP coding region was also used to make antisense constructs which contained either an RRE or had no additional export element. These constructs were essentially the same as the ones used to target the HIV env region in our previous experiments, except that a 721-bp GFP antisense sequence replaced the 927-bp env antisense sequence.
293T cells were transfected with LTR-GFP, pCMV-Rev, and antisense vectors which contained or lacked an RRE. A 5:1 and a 1:1 molar ratio of expression plasmid to antisense vector were used. After 48 h, cells were harvested and analyzed for GFP and β-tubulin expression (Fig. 7). Quantitation of the GFP after normalization to β-tubulin demonstrated that the RRE-driven antisense inhibited GFP expression from the LTR-GFP construct more efficiently than the antisense vector that contained no element. The inhibition observed was somewhat less potent than the inhibition seen with the HIV target provirus that trafficked through the RRE pathway (compare to Fig. 2A) but was very similar to the inhibition seen with the HIV target provirus that trafficked through the CTE pathway (compare to Fig. 2B). Thus, we conclude that trafficking of the antisense RNA through the Rev/RRE pathway promotes efficient inhibition, even on a non-HIV target sequence.
![]() View larger version (26K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 7. Antisense inhibition of EGFP expression from an LTR-driven EGFP plasmid. (A) A total of 106 293T cells were transfected with 5 µg of an LTR-driven GFP plasmid that expresses GFP under the control of the 5' HIV-1 LTR from pNL4-3 (pHR3754), together with 500 ng of pCMV-Rev (pHR30), 500 ng of pCMV-Tat (pHR136), and the indicated amounts of RRE-driven GFP antisense (pHR3755) or no-element EGFP antisense vector (pHR3757). The molar ratio of provirus and antisense plasmid and microgram amount of antisense plasmid is indicated above each lane. (A) Cells were harvested after 48 h, lysed, run on a 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel, and electrotransferred to Immobilon-FL. Protein expression was analyzed by using a commercial mouse monoclonal antibody to GFP (Covance) and a commercial polyclonal antibody to β-tubulin (Abcam). Blots were visualized by using the Odyssey infrared imaging system. (B) Blots were quantitated by using the Odyssey software package. After normalization to cellular β-tubulin, GFP expression was plotted as a percentage of LTR-GFP expression in the absence of antisense vector. AS, antisense.
|
|
|
|---|
Our data specifically show that efficient targeting requires trafficking of the antisense RNA along the Rev/RRE pathway. In support of this conclusion, we demonstrated that the inhibition of HIV-1 was virtually abolished when the antisense RNA lacked an RRE or when Rev was not provided. In addition, the efficiency of antisense inhibition was significantly reduced when the RRE-containing antisense RNA was redirected to the Tap/Nxf1 pathway that normally is used to export CTE-containing RNA and many cellular mRNAs. We conclude that the efficient inhibition achieved using HIV-1-derived lentiviral vectors can be explained by the specific RNA trafficking pathway utilized by HIV-1.
Cotargeting of the antisense and HIV-1 target RNA to the same cellular compartment in the nucleus has recently been proposed as a possible mechanism for the efficiency of the vector that is currently in clinical trials (61). It was proposed that this would trigger extensive adenosine deamination of the HIV-1-antisense duplex, resulting in nuclear retention of the resulting dsRNA complexes (36, 78). However, our results show that, although cotargeting may contribute to antisense efficiency, it is clearly not essential, since an HIV-1 proviral clone that was altered to use an MPMV CTE, rather than an RRE, was also efficiently inhibited by the RRE-driven antisense RNA in the presence of Rev. In this case, the antisense RNA used the Rev/RRE pathway, whereas the HIV-1 target RNA was exported through the Tap/Nxf1 pathway. Previous work from many laboratories have shown that these export pathways are separate and use different cellular factors (15, 21, 53).
If cotargeting were the dominant reason for the observed antisense inhibition, the efficiency would also have been expected to remain the same when RevM10-Tap was used to replace Rev in the export of the HIV-1 target and antisense RNA. Instead, the inhibition was significantly reduced, demonstrating that trafficking through the Rev pathway is a major determinant of efficient antisense inhibition. However, nuclear cotargeting may still contribute to antisense inhibition, since the CTE-driven antisense more efficiently targeted the RRE-virus that was forced to use the Tap/Nxf1 pathway. In addition, trafficking of both RRE and CTE-driven antisense RNAs and targets on the Tap/Nxf1 pathway also led to nearly identical inhibition profiles.
Our results clearly demonstrate that nuclear retention of HIV-1 target RNA did not contribute to the antisense inhibition that was achieved with the RRE-driven antisense RNA in the presence of Rev. Even when p24 levels were efficiently reduced, the GagPol RNA was still exported to the cytoplasm and present in polyribosomal complexes. In addition, our experiments with a proviral HIV-1 clone that did not give rise to virus particles demonstrated that the inhibition did not occur at the level of particle assembly or release. Thus, the antisense effects are manifested at the cytoplasmic level, after the association of the mRNA with the translation machinery, but before particle assembly.
We also showed that the reduction in p24 was not due to a general effect on protein synthesis, since Nef protein levels were unaffected by antisense expression. This specificity of inhibition for the HIV-1 target was somewhat surprising, since in mammalian cells, long double-stranded RNAs often activate protein kinase R and 2'5'-oligoadenylate synthetase, which leads to the interferon response and a general downregulation of translation and RNA degradation (29, 64). This suggests that trafficking of the antisense RNA through the Rev/RRE pathway somehow allows the interferon response to be bypassed. An analogous bypass mechanism has been suggested for inhibition by some siRNAs (12, 64).
Although in most cases, the appearance of an RNA in polyribosome complexes leads to production of protein, a reduction in the rate of initiation concomitant with a decrease in the rate of elongation can give rise to significantly reduced levels of protein ("ribosome stalling") that could explain the reduced GagPol protein levels seen (68). Another possibility is that protein is produced but rapidly degraded. Both of these mechanisms have been proposed to function in miRNA-mediated translation inhibition (51). Alternatively, the high-molecular-weight complexes could represent complexes that are EDTA sensitive and appear to be polyribosomes but are actually recently described pseudo-polyribosomal complexes (70). Further experiments will be needed to distinguish between these possibilities.
Independent of the detailed mechanism utilized, our results clearly point to a novel, previously unknown, mechanism for antisense inhibition. One model would be that Rev and the RRE allow the target/antisense RNA complex to be exported to the cytoplasm, where the antisense RNA functions to inhibit protein production. Intriguingly, there have been several reports that some of the more complex retroviruses produce natural antisense transcripts (5, 7, 37, 45, 50). The best characterized of these RNAs in HIV-1 appears to initiate from multiple transcription start sites 5' of the 3' LTR and extend into the pol region, where a novel polyadenylation site has recently been described (37). Although additional studies are needed to validate the presence of antisense RNA in HIV-1-infected cells, the evidence for the existence of an antisense transcript in the human T-cell leukemia retrovirus is much more compelling (7, 62, 71). In light of our finding that antisense transcripts can be potent inhibitors of gene expression in the HIV-1 system, further studies on the role of these natural transcripts in the regulation of HIV-1 and other retroviruses seem warranted.
Although we do not know whether a similar mechanism of antisense inhibition normally operates in the host cell to function in gene regulation, recent evidence indicates that expression of natural antisense RNA to normal gene transcripts may be a common occurrence (9, 17, 25). Although most mRNAs probably do not traffic down the Crm1 pathway used by Rev and the RRE, this pathway has been reported to be utilized by some mRNAs (35, 65). Thus, it is possible that mechanisms similar to the one we have described are utilized to regulate expression of cellular mRNAs.
In the case of cellular, as well as viral mRNA, it has been shown that regions of double-stranded RNA, resulting from the presence of inverted sequences in the RNA or association with antisense RNA, are subject to deamination by ADAR, leading to multiple inosines in the RNA (1). Such RNAs are normally retained in the nucleus through interaction with nuclear matrix proteins and eventually degraded (36, 57, 78). However, a previous study using the Xenopus oocyte export model showed that edited RNA was exported to the cytoplasm if the RNA contained an RRE and Rev was provided in trans (78). In addition, a previous study by Lu et al. using a lentivirus antisense vector reported that HIV-1 RNA recovered from cells expressing antisense RNA showed multiple mutations in the antisense target region of the HIV-1 genome that were consistent with ADAR activity (42). These results suggest that at least some of the genomic RNA, which was complexed with antisense RNA and edited as a result of formation of dsRNA, was eventually exported to the cytoplasm and packaged. Therefore, it seems possible that editing activity plays a role in antisense inhibition. It also follows that naturally occurring antisense could help provide retroviruses with an additional pathway for sequence diversification.
However, to date, reverse transcription-PCR sequencing of cytoplasmic RNA in cells transfected with proviral clones and plasmids expressing antisense RNA has failed to detect any mutations indicating ADAR editing (data not shown). Thus, we do not believe that editing is directly connected to the reduced protein levels we observe. Also, the target region is downstream of the GagPol ORF, and mutations in the target region, the 3' untranslated region, will thus not affect the GagPol protein per se. However, editing of even a small amount of the RNA could potentially lead to the production of miRNA from the antisense RNA (52). Inhibition by a miRNA-mediated mechanism would be consistent with the efficient inhibition we observe, and miRNA often exerts its effect at the translation level (55).
Irrespective of the mechanism utilized for antisense inhibition, our results are of importance for future development in the gene therapy field. The data suggest that it will be advantageous to ensure that any long antisense RNA designed to combat HIV-1 contains the RRE to allow trafficking along the Rev/RRE pathway, since this will likely significantly increase the efficiency of antisense inhibition. Our data also show that an RRE-driven antisense RNA, in combination with Rev, is able to efficiently inhibit a target that utilizes the CTE pathway. This raises the possibility that Rev/RRE trafficking of antisense RNA could also be exploited to make antisense RNA inhibition more efficient for non-HIV-1 applications.
This study was supported by National Institutes of Health grants CA097095 and AI054335 to M.-L.H. and grants AI054213 and AI068591 to D.R. Salary support for M.-L.H. and D.R. was provided by the Charles H. Ross, Jr., and Myles H. Thaler Endowments at the University of Virginia.
Published ahead of print on 29 October 2008. ![]()
|
|
|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»