4.6 Article

Impaired Infectivity of Ritonavir-resistant HIV Is Rescued by Heat Shock Protein 90AB1

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 286, 期 28, 页码 24581-24592

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M111.248021

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, NIAID [N01-AI-70002]
  2. California HIV/AIDS Research Program [ID09-SF-051]
  3. University of California
  4. San Francisco AIDS Research Institute
  5. Harvey V. Berneking Living Trust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Certain ritonavir resistance mutations impair HIV infectivity through incomplete Gag processing by the mutant viral protease. Analysis of the mutant virus phenotype indicates that accumulation of capsid-spacer peptide 1 precursor protein in virus particles impairs HIV infectivity and that the protease mutant virus is arrested during the early postentry stage of HIV infection before proviral DNA synthesis. However, activation of the target cell can rescue this defect, implying that specific host factors expressed in activated cells can compensate for the defect in ritonavir-resistant HIV. This ability to rescue impaired HIV replication presented a unique opportunity to identify host factors involved in postentry HIV replication, and we designed a functional genetic screen so that expression of a given host factor extracted from activated T cells would lead directly to its discovery by rescuing mutant virus replication in nonactivated T cells. We identified the cellular heat shock protein 90 kDa alpha (cytosolic), class B member 1 (HSP90AB1) as a host factor that can rescue impaired replication of ritonavir-resistant HIV. Moreover, we show that pharmacologic inhibition of HSP90AB1 with 17-(allylamino)-17-demethoxygeldanamycin (tanespimycin) has potent in vitro anti-HIV activity and that ritonavir-resistant HIV is hypersensitive to the drug. These results suggest a possible role for HSP90AB1 in postentry HIV replication and may provide an attractive target for therapeutic intervention.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据