| Literature DB >> 25270762 |
Heather A Niederer, Daniel J Laydon, Anat Melamed, Marjet Elemans, Becca Asquith, Masao Matsuoka, Charles R M Bangham1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: HTLV-1 causes proliferation of clonal populations of infected T cells in vivo, each clone defined by a unique proviral integration site in the host genome. The proviral load is strongly correlated with odds of the inflammatory disease HTLV-1-associated myelopathy/tropical spastic paraparesis (HAM/TSP). There is evidence that asymptomatic HTLV-1 carriers (ACs) have a more effective CD8 + T cell response, including a higher frequency of HLA class I alleles able to present peptides from a regulatory protein of HTLV-1, HBZ. We have previously shown that specific features of the host genome flanking the proviral integration site favour clone survival and spontaneous expression of the viral transactivator protein Tax in naturally infected PBMCs ex vivo. However, the previous studies were not designed or powered to detect differences in integration site characteristics between ACs and HAM/TSP patients. Here, we tested the hypothesis that the genomic environment of the provirus differs systematically between ACs and HAM/TSP patients, and between individuals with strong or weak HBZ presentation.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25270762 PMCID: PMC4192323 DOI: 10.1186/1743-422X-11-172
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Virol J ISSN: 1743-422X Impact factor: 4.099
Total patients analysed and integration sites identified
| Kagoshima | Kumamoto | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HAM/TSP | AC | AC | |||||||
|
| Strong HBZ | Weak HBZ |
| Strong HBZ | Weak HBZ |
| Strong HBZ | Weak HBZ |
|
| Whole cohort | 81 | 148 |
| 92 | 110 |
| 34 | 64 |
|
| All LM-PCR | 42 | 62 |
| 41 | 59 |
| 34 | 64 |
|
| LM-PCR QC pass | 39 | 56 |
| 30 | 38 |
| 24 | 51 |
|
|
| |||||||||
| <1 per 10,000 PBMC | 7954 | 12341 |
| 1451 | 5485 |
| 4572 | 9744 |
|
| 1-10 per 10,000 PBMC | 10051 | 12429 |
| 2178 | 2515 |
| 1034 | 1853 |
|
| >10 per 10,000 PBMC | 219 | 364 |
| 102 | 67 |
| 42 | 40 |
|
| All |
|
|
| ||||||
*UIS identified from LM-PCR QC pass samples only.
AC: Asymptomatic carrier, UIS: Unique integration site, QC pass: samples that passed LM-PCR quality controls (QC).
HLA class I alleles divided by HBZ epitope binding status
| Strong HBZ binding alleles | Weak HBZ binding alleles |
|---|---|
| A0201, A0206, A0207, A0210 | A0101 |
| A2601, A2602, A2603 | A0203 |
| A3001 | A0301, A0302 |
| A3303 | A1101 |
| A2402 | |
| A3101 | |
| A3201 | |
| B3701 | B0702 |
| B4001, B4002, B4006 | B1301, B1302 |
| B41 | B1501, B1507, B1511, B1518 |
| B4403 | B2704 |
| B3501, B3520, B3532/B3568 | |
| B3802 | |
| B3901 | |
| B4003, B4009/B4027/B40105 | |
| B4601 | |
| B4801 | |
| B5101 | |
| B5201 | |
| B5401 | |
| B5502, B5504 | |
| B5601, B5605 | |
| B5801 | |
| B5901, B5902 | |
| B6701 |
Linear regression of HBZ binding alleles to PVL
| Outcome | Predictor | Cohort* | n | Slope | p value | Controlling for: |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Log PVL | # HBZ binding alleles | Kagoshima HAM, AC | HAM: 221 AC: 200 | -0.12 | 0.021 | Age, sex, disease status |
| Log PVL | # HBZ binding alleles | Kumamoto AC | AC: 98 | -0.12 | 0.28 | |
| Log PVL | # HBZ binding alleles | Kagoshima HAM, AC & Kumamoto AC | HAM: 229 AC: 300 | -0.13 | 0.0058 | Disease status |
*Only individuals who had all the relevant information were included in the regression. Age, sex and disease status were included as factors where possible as they may vary with PVL.
Age and sex information was not available for the Kumamoto AC cohort.
PVL: proviral load, AC: Asymptomatic carrier, #: number of.
Figure 1Host disease status and HBZ-binding capacity do not alter total unique HTLV-1-infected clones or oligoclonality. HTLV-1 infected Japanese asymptomatic carriers (AC; triangles) from Kagoshima and Kumamoto prefectures and HAM/TSP patients (circles) from Kagoshima were stratified on the basis of predicted HBZ peptide binding affinity of host HLA class I alleles (strong binders, sHBZ, filled symbols; weak binders, wHBZ, open symbols). Each symbol represents one individual. Genomic DNA samples were processed by sonication-based LM-PCR and samples passing data quality checks were analysed further, as previously described ( [23, 24]). (A) The DivE method was used to estimate the total number of clones in the blood in each subject; the total clone number was positively correlated (Spearman correlation) with proviral load in each cohort both HAM (blue, p = 0.0004) and AC (black, p = 0.0001)). There was no significant difference in slope of the linear regression line between AC and HAM/TSP cohorts (likelihood ratio test, p = 0.30) or between sHBZ (continuous line) and wHBZ (dashed line) in the combined AC and HAM/TSP cohorts (likelihood ratio test, p = 0.06) indicating that there is no systematic difference in total clone number by disease status or HBZ binding status. (B) The oligoclonality index (OCI), which quantifies the diversity in observed clone abundance in each sample, was not significantly correlated with proviral load in ACs or HAM/TSP (Spearman correlation) and there was no significant difference in slope of the linear regression line between AC and HAM/TSP cohorts. (C) The median OCI did not differ significantly by HBZ binding status within individual cohorts (Mann-Whitney U test). Bars denote median +/- interquartile range.
Figure 2Transcriptionally active integration sites associate with AC status and clone abundance in weak HBZ binders. HTLV-1 unique integration sites from Japanese asymptomatic carriers (AC, black triangles) from Kagoshima and Kumamoto were compared to those from HAM/TSP patients (blue circles, from Kagoshima). Integration sites were stratified on the basis of predicted HBZ peptide binding affinity of host HLA class I alleles (strong binders, sHBZ, filled symbols; weak binders, wHBZ, open symbols) and binned by absolute abundance. Data is expressed versus an in silico generated random integration site dataset. (A) AC individuals (Kagoshima and Kumamoto cohorts combined) had a greater proportion of integration sites in genes than HAM/TSP patients (chi-squared test). Percentage of clones with integration sites in genes was correlated with clone abundance only in individuals with HLA class I alleles which could not bind HBZ (arrow, significant chi-squared test for trend). (B) Asymptomatic carriers had a higher frequency than HAM/TSP of H3K4me2 marks, enriched in transcriptionally active areas, within 10 Kb of integration sites (Mann-Whitney U test), and (C) a higher frequency of H3K4me1 marks, associated with enhancers. Mean epigenetic mark frequency near integration sites in a bin is divided by frequency near random sites. (D) In contrast, AC had a lower frequency of H3K9me3 marks, associated with constitutively heterochromatic DNA. Spearman correlation shows a significant (arrow) association between epigenetic mark frequency and log absolute abundance. Statistical comparisons AC vs HAM by Mann-Whitney U test after correction for multiple testing: * 0.05 > p > 0.01, ** 0.01 > p > 0.001, *** p < 0.001.
Proviral integration within genes and active genomic regions are independently associated with disease status
| Data | n | Outcome | In gene* | # H3K4me2 | # H3K9me3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Integration sites | AC: 29083 HAM/TSP: 43358 | AC vs HAM | OR | 1.08 | 1.13 | 0.88 |
| p value | 4.2×10-5 | 4.8×10-7 | 2.1×10-6 | |||
| Patients | AC: 143 HAM/TSP: 95 | AC vs HAM | OR | 1.12 | 1.14 | 1.0 |
| p value | 0.010 | 0.011 | 1.0 |
Additional factors controlled in multiple logistic regression model: Host HBZ binding status and proviral load, and log absolute clone abundance (per integration site) or log average absolute clone abundance (per patient).
*Percent of integration sites in gene per patient in patient-level analysis.
#: Number of specified epigenetic marks within 10 Kb of integration site. Averaged per patient in patient-level analysis.
OR: Odds ratio, AC: Asymptomatic carrier.
Proviral integration within genes and active genomic regions is associated with disease status
| Data | n | Outcome | In gene* | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Integration sites | sHBZ: 27603 wHBZ: 45439 | sHBZ vs wHBZ | OR | 1.04 |
| p value | 0.007 | |||
| Patients | sHBZ: 93 wHBZ: 146 | sHBZ vs wHBZ | OR | 1.03 |
| p value | 0.2 |
Additional factors controlled in multiple logistic regression model: Disease status and log absolute clone abundance (per integration site) or log average absolute clone abundance (per patient).
*Percent of integration sites in gene per patient in patient-level analysis.
OR: Odds ratio, sHBZ: strong HBZ binder, wHBZ: weak HBZ binder.