| Since the late 1970s, 8.4 million people worldwide, including 1.7 million children, have died of AIDS, and an estimated 22 million people are infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)(1). During 1995 and 1996, major clinical and laboratory discoveries regarding HIV pathogenesis provided new hope for the prevention and treatment of HIV infection. One major discovery was that members of the chemokine receptor family serve as cofactors for HIV entry into cells. We describe the role of allelic polymorphism in the gene coding for the CCR5 chemokine receptor with regard to susceptibility to and disease course of HIV infection. We also examine the effect of this discovery on medical and public health practices. |
The World Health Organization has estimated that 22.6 million people are infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) as of mid-1996 (1). The highest prevalence of HIV occurs in parts of Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. In 1995, HIV-associated illnesses caused the deaths of 1.3 million people, including 300,000 children under 5 years of age. No protective vaccine or cure is available, and while prevention methods are reducing incidence in some countries, HIV disease is expected to increase. Earlier HIV infection diagnosis, inhibition of ongoing HIV replication with antiretroviral therapy (in industrialized countries), and prevention and treatment of opportunistic infections and cancers delay the onset of AIDS and increase the life expectancy of HIV-infected persons.
Since the early years of the HIV epidemic, significant differences in the rate of disease progression have been observed in longitudinally followed HIV-infected persons. The role of genes of the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) system in determining the course of disease has been examined by using such measures as the CD4+ cell count or the length of time between HIV infection and AIDS (2-6). Several HLA genes or haplotypes appear to influence disease progression, although the effects are complex and may depend on interactions with other host genes.
Studies of the effect of host genes on susceptibility to HIV infection were facilitated by the identification of persons who were persistently exposed to HIV but remained uninfected (7-12). Before the discovery of the role of chemokine receptor gene polymorphism in HIV infection, only genes of the HLA system were thought to protect against HIV infection. For example, certain distributions of HLA class I alleles were observed in uninfected female commercial sex workers in Africa (13,14) and Thailand (11), who had been highly exposed to HIV; additional class I and II alleles that may be associated with remaining uninfected have been identified (6). Several mechanisms, some related to cytotoxic T-cell function, have been suggested to explain these findings (7,10,11,15).
Non-HLA genetic factors also influence susceptibility to HIV infection and the course
of HIV disease. In 1996 and 1997, studies
confirmed the protective role of homozygosity for a 32
base pair (bp) deletion in the chemokine receptor
gene, CCR5 (
32 CCR5), against HIV infection (9,12,16-19). Until recent reports of HIV
infection in three persons homozygous for the 32 bp
CCR5 deletion (20-22), no cases of HIV infection
had been reported in studies of more than 60
persons homozygous for the CCR5 32 bp deletion. Presence of one copy of the deleted CCR5
gene also influences the course of disease as the onset
of AIDS occurs later for some heterozygous persons than for those homozygous for the
wild type CCR5 (12,17-19,23). The discovery of the role of CCR5 alleles has prompted studies
of the possible role of many other host genes in HIV infection (24-26).
Chemokine receptors are cell surface proteins that bind small peptides called chemokines (27). Chemokines can be classified into three groups based on the number and location of conserved cysteines: C, CC, and CXC. Chemokine receptors are grouped into families on the basis of the chemokine ligands they bind: CC, CXC, or both (27; Table 1). Some receptors are promiscuous, while others are selective in terms of ligand binding. The receptors are widely distributed on hematopoietic and other cells, but the Duffy antigen of erythrocytes (DARC) is the only member expressed on cells of erythroid lineage. Several human chemokine receptors have been classified as such on the basis of similarity of gene sequences and predicted protein structures, but their ligands have not been identified (orphan receptors). Among these is the recently identified TER1 gene (28).
Table 1. Human chemokine receptors.
| Receptors
(Old names)a |
Ligands |
Predominant expression /Tissue distribution |
Pathogensb | Chromosome location |
GenBank Acc. # |
||||||
| C-C chemokines | CXC chemokines | ||||||||||
| CC Receptors | |||||||||||
| CCR1 (CC CKR1) |
|
monocytes, T cells |
3p21 |
L10918 |
|||||||
| CCR2A | MCP-1 |
T cells, basophils, monocytes |
3p21 | U03882 |
|||||||
| CCR2B (MCP-1Rb) |
MCP-1, 3, 4 | HIV-1 (NSI) | U03905 | ||||||||
| CCR3
(CKR3) |
Eotaxin, RANTES, MCP-2,3,4 |
eosinophil, basophils, microglial cells, and possibly monocytes; little expression in peripheral blood T-lymphocytes or dendritic cells |
HIV-1 (NSI) |
3p21 |
U28694 |
||||||
CCR4 |
TARC |
basophils, T cells |
3p24 |
X85740 |
|||||||
CCR5c (CC CKR5) |
RANTES,
MIP-1 |
monocytes, dendritic cells, microglial cells, T cells |
HIV-1 (NSI), HIV-2 |
3p21 |
U57840 |
||||||
CXC Receptors |
|||||||||||
CXCR1 (IL-8 RA) |
IL-8 |
neutrophils, NK cells |
2q35 |
M68932 |
|||||||
CXCR2 (IL-8 RB) |
IL-8,
MGSA, gro- |
M73969 |
|||||||||
CXCR3 |
IP-10, Mig |
activated T cells |
X95876 |
||||||||
CXCR4 (Fusin, LESTR, HUMSTR) |
SDF-1 |
wide: CD4+ and CD4- cells, monocytes, macrophages, dendritic cells, B cells; other tissues, e.g., brain, lung, spleen |
HIV-1 (SI) HIV-2 |
2q21 |
M99293 |
||||||
CC/CXC Receptor |
|||||||||||
DARC (Duffy antigen) |
RANTES, MCP-1, TARC etc. |
IL-8,
MGSA, gro- |
endothelial cells, erythrocytes |
Plasmodium vivax |
1 |
U01839 |
|||||
Othersd |
|||||||||||
STRL33 |
ND | ND | lymphoid tissues and activated T cells |
HIV-1 |
3 |
U73529 |
|||||
HCMV-US28 |
MIP-1 |
fibroblasts infected with CMV |
HIV-1 |
N/A |
X17403 |
||||||
ChemR1 |
ND | ND | T lymphocytes, polymorphonuclear cells |
3p21-24 |
Y08456 |
||||||
CMKBRL1 |
ND | ND | neutrophils, monocytes, brain, liver, lung, skeletal muscles |
3p21 |
U28934 |
||||||
TER1 |
ND | ND | thymus, spleen |
3p21 |
U62556 |
||||||
V28 |
ND | ND | Neural and lymphoid tissue |
3p21 |
U20350 |
||||||
D2S201E |
ND | ND | wide, including cells of hemopoietic origin |
2q21 |
M99293 |
||||||
BLR1 |
ND | ND | B lymphocytes |
X68149 |
|||||||
EBI1 |
ND | ND | B lymphocytes |
L08176 |
|||||||
GPR1,2,5 |
ND | ND | ND | L36149 |
|||||||
a New nomenclature for CC and CXC chemokine receptors was adopted at the Gordon Research Conference on Chemotactic Cytokines, June 23-28, 1996. bPathogens using this receptor for infection. cThe 32bp deleted allele of CCR5 has been referred to as CCR5-2 (19). dChemokine receptor-like genes whose predicted proteins have 7 transmembrane domains.
Abbreviations: BLR1, Burkitt's lymphoma receptor-1;
CMKBRL1, Chemokine
receptor like-1;
DARC, duffy antigen/receptor for chemokines; EBI1, Epstein-Barr
virus-induced receptor; ENA78, epithelial-derived
neutrophil-activating peptide-78; GPR, G protein coupled
receptor; gro, growth related gene product; HCMV, human
cytomegalovirus; HUMSTR, human serum transmembrane segment
receptor; IL, interleukin; IP-10, interferon-gamma inducible 10kD
protein; LESTR, leukocyte-expressed seven-transmembrane-domain
receptor; MCP, monocyte chemotactic protein; Mig, monokine
induced by interferon gamma; MIP, macrophage inflammatory
protein; NSI, non-syncytium inducing; N/A, not applicable; NAP-2,
neutrophil-activating protein-2; ND, not determined; RANTES,
regulated on activation, normal T cell expressed and secreted;
SDF-1, stromal cell-derived factor-1; STRL33, seven
transmembrane-domain receptor from lymphocyte clone 33; TARC, thymus and activation regulated chemokine.
The characteristic feature of all chemokine receptors is a serpentine 7 transmembrane-spanning domain structure, which is shared with other receptors; e.g., the rhodopsin and the thyrotrophin receptors (Figure 1). Extracellular portions are involved in chemokine binding, while intracellular portions are involved in cell signaling. The effect of receptor-ligand interactions is usually mediated through G-protein coupled interactions; results in alterations in cell function such as activation, motion, or migration, usually along a chemokine concentration gradient; and varies depending on the chemokine bound and the cell type (27).
Some chemokine receptors have a role in infectious disease susceptibility or pathogenesis. Several of the CC or CXC receptors are used by HIV-1 or HIV-2 as entry cofactors (Table 1). DARC serves as a cofactor for entry of Plasmodium vivax into erythrocytes (29); and as is the case with the 32bp-deleted CCR5 and HIV, resistance to P. vivax malaria is associated with lack of DARC expression (29), probably due to polymorphism of the DARC gene promoter (30). Several viruses (Epstein-Barr virus, cytomegalovirus, and Herpes virus samiri) contain functional homologues of human chemokine receptors, which suggests that the viruses may use these receptors to subvert the effects of host chemokines (27). They may also serve as HIV entry cofactors for human cells, as observed for HCMV-US28 (31).
The first clue that chemokine-related
events were important in HIV pathogenesis came
from work in R. Gallo's laboratory, which showed
that high levels of chemokines could inhibit HIV replication in vitro (32). Then a cohort of
highly exposed, HIV-negative men had high
circulating levels of several chemokines, such as
RANTES, MIP-1
, and MIP-1ß (8). These data led to
the hypothesis that chemokines might prevent HIV infection by binding to the elusive HIV
entry cofactor. Since the discovery of CD4 in the
1980s as an HIV receptor, it had become apparent
that other factors were required for HIV to enter
cells. For example, mouse cells expressing CD4
could not be infected with HIV (33). Using a novel cloning strategy, E. Berger and colleagues
first demonstrated in May 1996 that CXCR4, a chemokine receptor for which no ligand had
yet been determined, was an entry cofactor for
T-cell tropic or syncytium-inducing (SI) viruses
(34). Shortly before this, Samson et al. had
cloned CCR5 (then known as CC-CKR5) and shown that its ligands included RANTES,
MIP-1a, and MIP-1ß (35). These data encouraged several groups
to examine the role of CCR5 in HIV entry, and
within weeks of the CXCR4 publication, five
additional publications reported CCR5 and CCR3 as
HIV entry cofactors for macrophage-tropic or non-syncytium-inducing (NSI) viruses (33,36-39)
and CCR3 and CCR2b as entry factors for dual
tropic HIVs (38,39). Recent studies of
brain-derived microglial cells have shown that CCR5 and
CCR3 permit entry of HIV into these cells (40).
The tropism of HIV strains appears to be determined in part by the way they
use chemokine receptors (Table 1, Figure 2). In peripheral blood, although both T cells
and monocytes express CXCR4 and CCR5 (41), HIV strains that use CXCR4 tend to
infect predominantly T cells, while strains that
use CCR5 infect T cells and monocytes. This
tropism correlates with the ability of the virus to
induce syncytia in T-cell lines. SI viruses (often
present late in the course of HIV infection), tend to
be CXCR4 tropic, while NSI viruses (which appear to be the viruses transmitted in vivo) tend to
be CCR5 tropic (33,34,36-39). However, some primary SI viruses can use either CXCR4
or CCR5 (42), and some may use both coreceptors, as well as CCR2b or CCR3 (39). When
classified based on chemokine receptor use, HIV types
are independent of their genetic relatedness (43).
The exact mechanism by which HIV interacts with CXCR4 or CCR5 and by which this interaction, together with CD4 binding, leads to virus entry has not been clearly defined (44). It appears to involve the interactions of the V3 loop and other parts of the outer envelope protein gp120 (45-47) with extracellular domains of CCR5 or CCR2b (48,49) and may involve multistep interactions with CD4, the chemokine receptor, and other cell surface components (50). Chemokines may inhibit HIV entry through receptor blockade, desensitization, sequestration, or internalization; through alterations in receptor affinity; or by inhibiting postbinding steps (51), such as phosphorylation, through G-coupled mechanisms.
In 1995 and 1996, researchers at the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center began studies
of highly HIV-exposed seronegative men whose cells produced high levels of chemokines in
vitro (8,52,). Cells from several of these men were
not infectable with primary or NSI type viruses,
but were infectable with SI viruses (52). These
data suggested some protective mechanism related
to the CCR5 rather than to the CXCR4 receptor because of the chemokine ligand profile of
the CCR5 receptor (Table 1) and stimulated studies that led to the cloning and restriction digestion
of CCR5 in these persons (52). The novel deletion
of 32bp in CCR5 reported by Liu et al. (9) in
August 1996, to be present in three of the 15
HIV-exposed but seronegative men was also
independently reported in September by Samson et al. (16)
and Dean et al. (17; Table 2). In these studies,
the distribution of homozygosity and
heterozygosity of the deleted allele, in small and large
cross-sectional or prospective studies of
HIV-unexposed, -exposed, or -infected persons (mainly
European or North American Caucasians) strongly supported the protective effect of the
deletion. Since these initial observations, several
studies of other populations have reported the
same finding: an enrichment of the homozygous
32/
32 CCR5 genotype in highly HIV-exposed persons who remain uninfected (12,18,19;
Table 2). In persons with well-documented HIV exposure, the prevalence of homozygosity for
the
32/
32 CCR5 genotype increases with
increasing HIV exposure (12), the wild type and
32
CCR5 alleles (referred to by some as CCR5-1 and
CCR5-2 [19]) can be easily detected by polymerase
chain reaction (PCR) techniques, with or without enzymatic digestion (9,12,16,17), or
more recently, by heteroduplex studies (19). An example of the results of a PCR followed
by restriction digestion is given in Figure 3.
Persons who are homozygous for the wild type CCR5
(W) or the allele with the 32 bp deletion (
32) or heterozygous for both alleles can be
easily distinguished because the deleted fragment reduces the size of the amplified product
(Figure 3).
The 32 bp deletion occurs at a site of a repeat motif in the CCR5 gene (16; Figure 4) and results in a frame shift in the coding sequence that produces a defective CCR5, which is not expressed on the surface of cells (Figures 2 and 5). The deletion results in the loss of three of the seven transmembrane domains, two of the three outer loops, and the intracellular signaling domain (Figure 5).
The genetic link to remaining HIV-negative in spite of continued HIV exposure was
the subject of much discussion during the summer and fall of 1996. Was the protection
absolute? Who should be tested for the gene? Would persons told they were homozygous for
the deletion engage in high-risk behavior more frequently? Although at that point no
one homozygous for the deletion had been found HIV-positive, the fact that CXCR4 gene and
several other chemokine receptors could mediate
HIV entry suggested caution in assuming that persons with the CCR5
32/
32 genotype would be absolutely resistant to HIV infection.
Since then, three HIV-infected persons with this genotype have been reported (20-22; Table
2); for one, the mode of transmission was most likely blood products (21), while the only
reported exposure risk for the other two was
homosexual behavior (20,22). Sequences isolated from
these persons suggested the SI virus phenotype,
i.e., viruses that most likely used CXCR4 as entry cofactors (21; R.
Ffrench, pers. comm.). As several other non-CCR5
receptors (CCR3 and CCR2b) are also HIV entry cofactors,
even non-SI viruses might be transmissible in vivo
in persons homozygous for the CCR5 32 bp deletion.
Thus, HIV entry by non-CCR5 dependent mechanisms
can occur in vivo, and persons who have the CCR5
32/
32 genotype are not absolutely protected.
Table 2. Population studies of CCR5 genotypes
| Author | Population | Ethnicity | HIV Status | No. | aCCR5 Genotypes % (N) |
|||
| W/W |
w/ |
|||||||
| Liu et al. (9) |
High-risk, USA | Caucasian | Neg | 15 | 80.0 (12) |
0 (0) | 20.0 (3) | 0.200 |
| General, USA | Caucasian | Neg | 122 | 80.3 (98) |
19.7 (24) |
0 (0) | 0.098 | |
| General, S. America | Venezuelan | Neg | 46 | 100 (46) |
0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Samson et al. (16) |
General, Europe | Caucasian | Neg | 704 | 82.7 (582) |
16.2 (114) |
1.1 (8) | 0.092 |
| General, Asia | Japanese | Neg | 248 | 100 (248) |
0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| General, Africa | Ctrl/West African | Neg | 124 | 100 (124) |
0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| AIDS clinics, Paris | Caucasian | Pos | 723 | 89.2 (645) |
10.8 (78) |
0 (0) | 0.054 | |
| Dean et al.b(17) |
High-risk, USA | Mixed | Neg | 883 | 81.9 (724) |
15.6 (138) |
2.4 (21) |
0.10 |
| High-risk, USA | Mixed | Pos | 1883 | 85.9 (1618) |
14.0 (264) |
0.0005 (1) |
0.071 | |
| High-risk, USA | African-Amer | Mixed | 620 | 96.6 (599) |
3.4 (21) |
0 (0) | 0.017 | |
| High-risk, USA | Caucasian | Mixed | 1250 | 0.115 | ||||
| Low-risk, USA | Caucasian | Mixed | 143 | 0.080 | ||||
| Huang et al.(12) |
High-risk, USA | Caucasian | Pos | 461 | 79.8 (368) |
20.2 (93) |
0 (0) | 0.101 |
| High-risk, USA | Caucasian | Neg | 446 | 78.0 (348) |
16.7 (82) |
3.6 | 0.128 | |
| Blood donors, USA | Caucasian (95%) |
Neg | 637 | 85.2 | 13.3 | 1.4 | 0.08 | |
| General, Africa/Haiti | Black | Mixed | 137 | 100 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| General, Asia | China/Thai/other | Mixed | 191 | 100 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Michael et al. (18) |
High-risk, USA | Mixed | Pos | 406 | 87.5 (348) |
14.3 (58) |
0 (0) | 0.071 |
| High-risk, USA | Mixed | Neg | 21 | 71.4 (15) |
9.5 (2) |
19.1 (4) |
0.238 | |
| Intermediate-risk, USA | Mixed | Neg | 240 | 78.3 (188) |
20.4 (49) |
1.3 (3) |
0.115 | |
| Biti et al.(20) |
High-risk, Australia | Caucasian | Pos | 265 | N/Ac | N/A | 0.004 (1) |
N/A |
| Theodoru et al. (22) |
High-risk, Europe | Pos | 412 | N/A | N/A | 0.002 (1) |
N/A | |
| Eugenolsen et al. (23) |
High-risk, Denmark | Caucasian | Neg | 35 | 74 (26) |
20 (7) |
6 (2) |
0.157 |
| High-risk, Denmark | Caucasian | Pos | 99 | 78 (77) |
22 (22) |
0 | 0.111 | |
| Blood donors, Denmark | Caucasian | Neg | 37 | 73 (27) |
24 (9) |
3 (1) |
0.149 | |
| Zimmerman et al. (19) |
Blood donors, North America | Caucasian | Neg | 387 | 77.5 (300) |
21.7 (84) |
0.8 (3) |
0.116 |
| African Amer | Neg | 294 | 94.2 (277) |
5.8 (17) |
0 (0) | 0.29 | ||
| Hispanic | Neg | 290 | 92.8 (269) |
6.9 (20) |
0.3 (1) |
0.38 | ||
| Asian | Neg | 164 | 99.4 (163) |
0.6 (1) |
0 (0) | 0.003 | ||
| Native Amer. | Neg | 87 | 83.9 (73) |
12.6 (11) |
3.4 (3) |
0.098 | ||
| Blood donors, India | Tamil | Neg | 46 | 100 (46) |
0 (0) | 0(0) | 0 | |
| Blood donors, W. Africa | Black | Neg | 40 | 100 (40) |
0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| High Risk, USA | Caucasian | Pos | 614 | 77.4 (475) |
22.6 (139) |
0 (0) | 0.113 | |
| High Risk, USA | African Amer | Pos | 86 | 97.7 (84) |
2.3 (2) |
0 (0) | 0.012 | |
| High Risk, USA | Hispanic | Pos | 45 | 93.3 (42) |
6.7 (3) |
0 (0) | 0.033 | |
| High Risk USA | Caucasian | Neg | 111 | 73.9 (82) |
21.6 (24) |
4.5 (5) |
0.0153 | |
| High Risk, USA | African Amer | Neg | 2 | 50.0 (1) |
0 (0) | 0.250 | ||
| High Risk, USA | Hispanic | Neg | 12 | 91.7 (11) |
8.3 (1) |
0 (0) | 0.042 | |
a CCR5 genotypes: W/W, homozygous wild type;
W/
32, heterozygous wild type/32bp deletion;
32/
32,
homozygous for the 32 bp deletion.
b Numbers updated to include additional Multicenter Hemophiulia Cohort Study patients studied by O'Brien et al. (21) and Dean et al. (pers .comm.).
cNotSUP>cNot available
Figure 4. Partial CCR5 gene and amino acid sequence with 32 bp deletion.
Nucleotide sequence of the CCR5 gene surrounding the deleted region,
and translation into the normal receptor (top lines) or the truncated mutant
(
32 CCR5, bottom lines). The 10-bp direct repeat is represented in bold italics
and the deleted nucleotides are represented in noncapitalized font.
Figure 5. Predicted structure and amino acid sequence of the mutant form of human CCR5. The mutant protein lacks the last three transmembrane segments of CCR5, as well as the regions involved in G-protein coupling. The transmembrane organization is given by analogy with the predicted transmembrane structure of the wild-type CCR5, although the correct maturation of the mutant protein up to the plasma membrane has not been demonstrated. The shaded horizontal band represents membrane (s) of intracellular organelles. Amino acids represented in italic and dark shading correspond to unnatural residues resulting from the frame shift caused by the deletion. Figures 4 and 5 reprinted and modified with permission from the authors and Nature (16) Copyright (1996) Macmillan Magazines Ltd.
The highest reported prevalence of homozygosity for the
32 CCR5 allele deletion in persons highly exposed to HIV but uninfected
is 33% (9,12). However, most (96% according to one estimate [19]) highly exposed
HIV-seronegative persons are not homozygous for the
32 CCR5 allele. Moreover, among exposed but
persistently HIV-seronegative persons in Africa and
Thailand, no one positive for the
32 CCR5 allele has
been found (CDC unpub. data; S. Rowland-Jones, F. Plummer, pers. comm.). These data suggest
that many mechanisms may contribute to remaining seronegative despite high HIV
exposure: chemokine-related mechanisms, such as
altered CCR5 levels on the cell surface (53) or the level
of circulating chemokines; other immune system genes, such as those of the HLA
system (10,11,14); and immune responses, such as
those of cytotoxic T cells (7,15). The relative
importance of these mechanisms in populations with differing modes of exposure or
genetic backgrounds needs to be elucidated.
Several large studies of the effect of
CCR5 genotypes on the course of HIV disease have
been published (Table 2). Dean et al. examined the course of HIV (time to AIDS) in several U.
S. populations with different exposure to HIV (homosexuals, intravenous drug users,
persons with hemophilia) and found that persons
with one copy of the deleted CCR5 gene had a
delayed (approximately 2 years longer) progression
to AIDS when compared with those with the homozygous wild type genotype (17).
Similar findings have been reported (19,23) in
Caucasian HIV-positive homosexual men. Another study
of HIV-positive homosexuals did not find such a striking effect of heterozygosity,
although progression to AIDS was again slowed (12).
One clue to the varying effects of the
heterozygous CCR5 genotype on progression to AIDS
in different groups comes from another U. S. study of male homosexuals, in which men with one
copy of the
32 CCR5 genotype had delayed progression to AIDS, particularly if
their circulating viruses were of the NSI
phenotype (18). Paradoxically, once AIDS is
diagnosed, persons with one copy of
32 CCR5 may have
a more rapid disease course. Thus, the effect of
the CCR5 genotype on disease progression may depend on the phenotype and chemokine
receptor use of circulating viruses. The finding
that microglial cells can be infected with HIV
through CCR3- or CCR5-dependent mechanisms (40) also suggests that the clinical spectrum of
HIV disease may also depend on the CCR5
genotype.1
Thus, complex interactions between virus and host chemokine receptor genotype and virus and cell chemokine receptor phenotype exist. Studies to elucidate the interaction of these genotypes with each other, with virus phenotypes, and with other factors that influence the course of HIV disease are ongoing (24,25). Preliminary data from the Multi Center AIDS Cohort Study suggest that the effect of CCR5 and HLA genotype on survival or disease course are independent and that the effect of HLA on disease outcomes may be greater than the effect of CCR5 genotype (54).
The distribution of the 32bp deletion in different populations is summarized in Table 2. Among Caucasians in North America or Europe, the prevalence of homozygosity for the 32 bp deletion is approximately 1%, and 10% to 20% are heterozygous. In smaller numbers of non-Caucasians, heterozygosity is found in approximately 6% of African-Americans, 7% of Hispanics, 13% of Native Americans, and fewer than 1% of Asians (17,19; CDC, unpub. data). Several studies of non-Caucasian populations including persons from parts of Africa (Zaire, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Senegal, Benin, Uganda, Rwanda, Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Sierre Leone) (12,16,19), Haiti (12), parts of Asia (Thailand, India, China, Korea, Japan, the Philippines) (12,16,19; CDC, unpub. data), and Venezuela (9) have not found the 32 bp deletion among the HIV-infected or -uninfected persons tested (Table 2). One additional study (of more than 3,000 persons) found similar global distributions of CCR5 genotypes (and noted a decreasing frequency from north to south in Europe and Asia).2
Several other point mutations in CCR5 have been observed (17), but their population prevalence and their role in HIV infection or disease progression have not been reported. No polymorphisms in CXCR4 have been reported to date. CCR3 has two alleles (S or T at position 276) (55-57), and similarly, the population prevalence of these alleles and their role in HIV infection have not yet been determined.
The discovery of the role of chemokine receptors as coreceptors, along with CD4, for
HIV entry has led to a burgeoning of public and private research in HIV pathogenesis,
new therapies, and new approaches to vaccines (52,58). For example, in addition to
the classification of HIV types on the basis of
genetic or neutralization phenotype relatedness, a
new virus classification made on the basis of
their receptor use has emerged. New therapies
based on receptor mimics, receptor ligands,
chemokines, or chemokine analogs are being developed
and tested in vitro. Genetic engineering with chemokine receptors is being used to
develop animal models for HIV transmission and
disease progression. And, in the arena of vaccines, a
new concept has developed: the induction of high levels of HIV-blocking chemokines such
as RANTES, MIP-1
, and MIP-1ß as desirable properties of an HIV vaccine.
New treatments and prevention measures for HIV raise ethical, social, and legal issues
that also relate to a number of other infectious
and chronic diseases (e.g., malaria, breast
cancer, and diabetes) as new genes influencing the
risk for these diseases are discovered. Should all persons at risk for HIV infection be tested
for CCR5 gene polymorphism? Should all persons homozygous for the
32 CCR5 genotype receive specific counseling regarding their risk for
HIV and other sexually transmitted infections? If
a person is heterozygous and infected with HIV, should HIV treatment be altered?
Could knowledge of one's genotype favorably or unfavorably influence health insurance,
life insurance, or employment opportunities? As
a result of these questions, educational materials have become available for the public and
public health professionals.3
Another finding that provoked discussion was the uneven distribution of the
genotype across geographic and racial groups. One hypothesis was that some previous
epidemic, restricted to Europe, had led to a
survival advantage among persons homozygous or heterozygous for the CCR5
32 genotype and had resulted in a concentration of the CCR5
32 genotype in persons of European ancestry. The "black death" of Northern Europe
(1347-1350) and other large epidemics have been used
as examples (59,60). Thus, certain populations appear to have an increased survival
advantage in the new HIV epidemic. Conversely,
populations with lower prevalence of the
32 CCR5
genotype might be expected to have a higher prevalence
of HIV infection or a more rapid course of the epidemic. In the United States, a greater risk
for HIV infection has been found among African-Americans than among Caucasians, when
known risk factors, including social class, were controlled (61). The prevalence of the
32 CCR5 allele is lower in African-Americans than
in Caucasians. While increasing HIV prevalence in parts of Asia and Africa may be attributed
to social and demographic factors, as well as differences in the phenotype of
circulating viruses (62), the racial distribution of HIV
risk raises the possibility that differences in
the distribution of the
32 CCR5 allele or other heritable host factors might influence the
rate of transmission or the speed of the epidemic
in different racial groups.
These findings have defined a new role for a gene that normally controls cell migration; have identified new alleles of the gene that determines whether someone becomes infected with HIV and how the disease progresses once infection has occurred; and have identified several other new HIV-receptors that mediate viral entry into different cell types. The findings have precipitated new classifications of HIV phenotypes by cell tropism and receptor use and opened new areas for drug and vaccine development. These findings have also enhanced other research: studies of host factors affecting the acquisition and clinical course of infectious diseases, the differential distribution of genetic characteristics in populations and their potential effects on health status, the translation of genetics research into public health measures, and the social implications of genetic differences affecting illness and death caused by infectious and other diseases.
About the Author
Dr. McNicholl is a scientist in the Immunology Branch, Division of AIDS, STD, TB, and Laboratory Research, NCID, CDC, and an Assistant Professor of Medicine (Rheumatology) and Pathology at Emory University. Her research includes immunogenetics and T cell antigen recognition in infectious and autoimmune diseases, and their application to vaccines. In collaboration with other scientists at CDC and in Thailand, she is investigating immunologic and genetic explanations for apparent resistance to HIV of highly exposed persistently seronegative commercial sex workers in Thailand. She also serves as the NCID coordinator for CDC genetics activities.
Address for correspondence: Janet McNicholl, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, MS A-25, 1600 Clifton Rd. N.E., Atlanta, GA 30333 USA; fax: 404-639-2149; e-mail: jkm7@cdc.gov.
References
1Garred P, Eugen-Olsen J, Iversen AKN, Benfield TL, Svejgaard A, Hofmann, B, the Copenhagen AIDS Study Group. Dual
effect of CCR5 D32 gene deletion in HIV-1-infected patients. Lancet 1997; 349:1884.
2Martinson JJ, Chapman NH, Rees DC, Lui Y-T, Clegg JB. Global distribution of the CCR5 gene 32-basepair deletion
[letter]. Nature Genetics 1997;16:100-103.
3Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Facts about CCR5 and protection against HIV-1 infection; 1997.
URL: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol3no3/smith.htm