Identification of novel HIV-1 dependency factors in primary CCR4+CCR6+Th17 cells via a genome-wide transcriptional approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The HIV-1 infection is characterized by profound CD4(+) T cell destruction and a marked Th17 dysfunction at the mucosal level. Viral suppressive antiretroviral therapy restores Th1 but not Th17 cells. Although several key HIV dependency factors (HDF) were identified in the past years via genome-wide siRNA screens in cell lines, molecular determinants of HIV permissiveness in primary Th17 cells remain to be elucidated. RESULTS: In an effort to orient Th17-targeted reconstitution strategies, we investigated molecular mechanisms of HIV permissiveness in Th17 cells. Genome-wide transcriptional profiling in memory CD4(+) T-cell subsets enriched in cells exhibiting Th17 (CCR4(+)CCR6(+)), Th1 (CXCR3(+)CCR6(-)), Th2 (CCR4(+)CCR6(-)), and Th1Th17 (CXCR3(+)CCR6(+)) features revealed remarkable transcriptional differences between Th17 and Th1 subsets. The HIV-DNA integration was superior in Th17 versus Th1 upon exposure to both wild-type and VSV-G-pseudotyped HIV; this indicates that post-entry mechanisms contribute to viral replication in Th17. Transcripts significantly enriched in Th17 versus Th1 were previously associated with the regulation of TCR signaling (ZAP-70, Lck, and CD96) and Th17 polarization (RORγt, ARNTL, PTPN13, and RUNX1). A meta-analysis using the NCBI HIV Interaction Database revealed a set of Th17-specific HIV dependency factors (HDFs): PARG, PAK2, KLF2, ITGB7, PTEN, ATG16L1, Alix/AIP1/PDCD6IP, LGALS3, JAK1, TRIM8, MALT1, FOXO3, ARNTL/BMAL1, ABCB1/MDR1, TNFSF13B/BAFF, and CDKN1B. Functional studies demonstrated an increased ability of Th17 versus Th1 cells to respond to TCR triggering in terms of NF-κB nuclear translocation/DNA-binding activity and proliferation. Finally, RNA interference studies identified MAP3K4 and PTPN13 as two novel Th17-specific HDFs. CONCLUSIONS: The transcriptional program of Th17 cells includes molecules regulating HIV replication at multiple post-entry steps that may represent potential targets for novel therapies aimed at protecting Th17 cells from infection and subsequent depletion in HIV-infected subjects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".