Some T-cell-line-passaged HIV-2 strains infect CXCR4
+ cells without CD4 (
27,
63). The first CD4-independent variant we identified (ROD/B) emerged spontaneously from a T-cell line chronically infected with the prototype HIV-2
ROD strain (
14). The ROD/B envelope retains the capacity to interact with CD4, but can efficiently utilize CXCR4 alone for infection of CD4
− cells (
63). Only two amino acid substitutions in the envelope (one at the base of the V4 loop and one near the leucine zipper-like domain in the transmembrane) were required to confer CD4 independence on ROD, although further changes (in the V3 loop and at the base of V4) increased the efficiency of infection without CD4 (
64). Whether ROD/B-like strains evolve or exist in vivo and whether CD4-independent infection influences HIV-2 tropism or pathogenesis has been unclear. We show here, however, that many primary HIV-2 isolates can infect CD4
− cells via human CCR5 or CXCR4. CD4-independent infection via CCR5 was at levels similar to those of the CD4-independent SIV strains. Rhesus CCR5 has been shown to function more efficiently than human CCR5 as a primary receptor for SIV (
25), but was not utilized in these studies. No HIV-1 strains were found to use CCR5 in the absence of CD4 (Fig. ), although one primary HIV-1 X4 isolate (2005) infected CD4
− CCC cells via CXCR4. To assess whether CD4-independent and sCD4-induced infection of CD4
− cell lines was relevant for in vivo replication, we tested if primary HIV-2 isolates infected primary CXCR4
+ fetal astrocyte cultures. Only the TCLA HIV-2 strain, ROD/B, infected primary astrocytes. The primary X4 strains, MIL and SAB, both of which efficiently infect CXCR4
+ CCC and U87 cells without CD4, did not infect the astrocyte cultures, although infection was induced by sCD4. These results demonstrate that the capacity of HIV-2 strains to infect CD4
− cells is profoundly influenced by cell type and determined by the concentration/presentation of cell surface coreceptors and/or by currently unidentified cell surface factors.
For HIV-1, non-syncytium-inducing/R5 strains are usually transmitted. Syncytium-inducing (SI) strains that use CXCR4 can be isolated from about 50% of AIDS patients, and their emergence correlates with a more rapid decline in numbers of CD4
+ T-cells (
42). Such SI viruses either can use a range of coreceptors, including CCR5 and CXCR4, or alternatively seem to be specific for CXCR4 (
76). Similarly, HIV-2 isolates that use mainly CCR5 and not CXCR4 have been identified (
32,
58,
78); however, the majority of isolates use a broad range of coreceptors, including CCR5 and CXCR4 as well as coreceptors rarely used by HIV-1 (e.g., CCR1) (
9,
32,
51,
58,
78). Two primary HIV-2 isolates studied here used CXCR4 only or predominantly, yet few such HIV-2 strains have been reported previously (
32). These two X4 viruses were proficient for infection of CD4
− CXCR4
+ cell lines.
HIV-1 strains that use both CCR5 and CXCR4 (R5X4) interact differently with CCR5 compared to R5 viruses. CCR5-dependent infection by R5X4 strains is especially sensitive both to CCR5 amino acid substitutions (
5,
59) and to inhibition by the β-chemokine RANTES (
41). Thus, evolution of HIV-1 from R5 to R5X4 seems to compromise the interaction of the viral envelope with CCR5. Here, CD4-independent infection by HIV-2 R5X4 strains indicated a spectrum of phenotypes, none of which were able to use both CCR5 and CXCR4. Of seven R5X4 strains, one used CCR5 only and three used CXCR4 only, while the three others used neither CCR5 nor CXCR4 efficiently for CD4-independent infection. It is possible therefore that CD4-independent infection by these R5X4 strains reflects an evolution from high-CCR5–low-CXCR4, low-CCR5–low-CXCR4 to low-CCR5–high-CXCR4 affinity. For these strains, interaction with CD4 presumably overrides lower env-7TM interactions and increases the range of coreceptors available for infection.
It is uncertain why HIV usually needs two coreceptors to enter cells, nor is it clear whether other lentiviruses or retroviruses use one or two receptors. Single receptors have been identified for murine leukemia virus (MLV); the 14-transmembrane cation transporter for ecotropic MLV (
1) and the 10-transmembrane phosphate transporter, Pit-2, for amphotropic MLV (
54). Gibbon ape leukemia virus and feline leukemia virus both use the related phosphate transporter, Pit-1 (
37,
81). Avian leukosis subgroup A (ALV-A) viruses use a receptor related to the low-density lipoprotein receptor (
90), while subgroups B and D share a tumor necrosis factor receptor-like molecule (
8). Although it seems likely that these receptors are sufficient to trigger virus entry and replication, only for ALV-A is there direct evidence that the identified receptor alone is needed (
20,
34). Willett et al. (
85,
86) showed that cell-line-adapted strains of feline immunodeficiency virus use CXCR4 (either feline or human CXCR4) for entry, but so far no other receptor equivalent to CD4 has been identified.
We speculate that the viral ancestors of HIV and SIV originally used a 7TM receptor alone. Acquisition of a second receptor such as CD4 may have provided selective advantages to a virus that persistently replicates in the face of a vigorous host immune response. Variation in the envelope must help the virus to escape from neutralizing antibodies, but too much divergence will inevitably weaken the envelope-7TM interaction and reduce the efficiency of infection. On the HIV-1 envelope, the gp120 site for binding the 7TM receptor is exposed only after CD4 is contacted. This mechanism may enable potential neutralizing epitopes on or around the 7TM binding site to be hidden until the fusion reaction is triggered, and perhaps even then. Our results suggest that for HIV-2 and SIV, the envelope glycoproteins form a subtly different conformation compared to HIV-1, where the 7TM binding site on gp120 is at least partially exposed or formed, enabling direct contact without CD4. The role of CD4 binding for these strains is currently unclear but may (i) modify the 7TM binding site to increase the affinity of the env-7TM interaction, or (ii) contribute extra energy or a “kick” to the env-7TM contact needed to trigger fusion of viral and cell membranes. Either or both of these roles would provide HIV-2 with the capacity to exploit coreceptors that otherwise do not interact with gp120 strongly enough to trigger fusion.
Astrocytes do not express CD4 yet become infected in vivo, at least in pediatric HIV-1 AIDS cases (
68,
74). Such infection is relatively unproductive, with structural
gag and
env genes poorly expressed. Coreceptors used for infection of astrocytes have not been identified, although glial cell lines, e.g., U87, NP2 and U373, do not usually express CXCR4 or CCR5. The primary fetal astrocytes used in this study, however, were positive for CXCR4 and supported replication by ROD/B, thus demonstrating the potential of such cells to support replication in vivo. The lack of astrocyte infection by primary X4 HIV-2 strains, in the absence of sCD4, may be due to the relatively low level of CXCR4 expression on astrocytes compared to that CXCR4
+ CCC and U87 cell lines, although Edinger et al. recently reported that CD4-independent infection by SIV strains required only a low level of CCR5 (
25). Alternatively, CXCR4 may be present on astrocytes in a different conformation than that found on the cell lines examined in this paper, as recently shown for CCR5 on different cell types (
47). It has also been shown that CXCR4 may exist mainly as oligomers in macrophages, compared to monomers in monocytes, which may influence coreceptor activity (
46). Additionally, posttranslational modifications such as glycosylation or sulfation may affect the efficiency of coreceptor utilization (
29,
61,
82). Our results showing CD4-independent infection by primary HIV-2 strains on cell lines in vitro should therefore be interpreted with care until further studies are done to elucidate the cell types that are infected by HIV-2 in vivo. We cannot rule out a very low level of infection of astrocytes by primary HIV-2 isolates, because PCR detection or coculture with susceptible cell types was not attempted. Whether mechanisms analogous to sCD4-induced infection occur in vivo is unknown, although soluble forms of CD4 have been detected in serum (
44). Astrocytes represent only one cell type that is a potential target for HIV-2 infection in vivo. Other CD4
− cell types expressing either CCR5 or CXCR4 may behave more like the CCC, U87, or NP2 cell lines shown here to be susceptible to HIV-2 infection without CD4. Our observations, however, show clearly that primary HIV-2 isolates (as for SIV strains) carry the potential to infect CD4
− cells in vivo via an interaction with CCR5 or CXCR4 that bypasses CD4.