HIV-1 down-regulates CD96, revealing the role for this receptor in regulating the antiviral immune responses in CD4+ T cells.

A metabolic modeling approach reveals druggable host cell pathways essential for viral replication across various viruses with minimal cytotoxicity. These findings highlight cellular metabolism as a promising target for antiviral therapy.

HIV-1 encodes four accesory proteins in addition to its structural and regulatory genes. Uniquely amongst them, Vpr is abundantly present within virions, meaning it is poised to exert various biological effects on the host cell upon delivery. In this way, Vpr contributes towards the establishment of a successful infection, as evidenced by the extent to which HIV-1 depends on this factor to achieve full pathogenicity in vivo. Although HIV infects various cell types in the host organism, CD4+ T cells are preferentially targeted since they are highly permissive towards productive infection, concomitantly bringing about the hallmark immune dysfunction that accompanies HIV-1 spread. The last several decades have seen unprecedented progress in unraveling the activities Vpr possesses in the host cell at the molecular scale, increasingly underscoring the importance of this viral component. Nevertheless, it remains controversial whether some of these advances bear in vivo relevance, since commonly employed cellular models significantly differ from primary T lymphocytes. One prominent example is the “established” ability of Vpr to induce G2 cell cycle arrest, with enigmatic physiological relevance in infected primary T lymphocytes. The objective of this review is to present these discoveries in their biological context to illustrate the mechanisms whereby Vpr supports HIV-1 infection in CD4+ T cells, whilst identifying findings that require validation in physiologically relevant models.

The tetraspanin CD81 is one of the main entry receptors for Hepatitis C virus, which is a major causative agent to develop liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular...

Coronavirus infection induces interferon-stimulated genes, one of which encodes Tetherin, a transmembrane protein inhibiting the release of various enveloped viruses from infected cells. Previous studies revealed that SARS-CoV encodes two Tetherin antagonists: the Spike protein (S), inducing lysosomal degradation of Tetherin, and ORF7a, altering its glycosylation. Similarly, SARS-CoV-2 has also been shown to use ORF7a and Spike to enhance virion release in the presence of Tetherin. Here, we directly compare the abilities and mechanisms of these two viral proteins to counteract Tetherin. Therefore, cell surface and total Tetherin levels upon ORF7a or S expression were investigated using flow cytometry and Western blot analysis. SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 S only marginally reduced Tetherin cell surface levels in a cell type-dependent manner. In HEK293T cells, under conditions of high exogenous Tetherin expression, SARS-CoV-2 S and ORF7a reduced total cellular Tetherin levels much more efficiently than the respective counterparts derived from SARS-CoV. Nevertheless, ORF7a from both species was able to alter Tetherin glycosylation. The ability to decrease total protein levels of Tetherin was conserved among S proteins from different SARS-CoV-2 variants (α, γ, δ, ο). While SARS-CoV-2 S and ORF7a both colocalized with Tetherin, only ORF7a directly interacted with the restriction factor in a two-hybrid assay. Despite the presence of multiple Tetherin antagonists, SARS-CoV-2 replication in Caco-2 cells was further enhanced upon Tetherin knockout. Altogether, our data show that endogenous Tetherin restricts SARS-CoV-2 replication and that the antiviral activity of Tetherin is only partially counteracted by viral antagonists with differential and complementary modes of action.