54 research outputs found

    Cathepsin-L can resist lysis by human serum in Trypanosoma brucei brucei.

    Get PDF
    Closely related African trypanosomes cause lethal diseases but display distinct host ranges. Specifically, Trypanosoma brucei brucei causes nagana in livestock but fails to infect humans, while Trypanosoma brucei gambiense and Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense cause sleeping sickness in humans. T. b. brucei fails to infect humans because it is sensitive to innate immune complexes found in normal human serum known as trypanolytic factor (TLF) 1 and 2; the lytic component is apolipoprotein-L1 in both TLFs. TLF resistance mechanisms of T. b. gambiense and T. b. rhodesiense are now known to arise through either gain or loss-of-function, but our understanding of factors that render T. b. brucei susceptible to lysis by human serum remains incomplete. We conducted a genome-scale RNA interference (RNAi) library screen for reduced sensitivity to human serum. Among only four high-confidence 'hits' were all three genes previously shown to sensitize T. b. brucei to human serum, the haptoglobin-haemoglobin receptor (HpHbR), inhibitor of cysteine peptidase (ICP) and the lysosomal protein, p67, thereby demonstrating the pivotal roles these factors play. The fourth gene identified encodes a predicted protein with eleven trans-membrane domains. Using chemical and genetic approaches, we show that ICP sensitizes T. b. brucei to human serum by modulating the essential cathepsin, CATL, a lysosomal cysteine peptidase. A second cathepsin, CATB, likely to be dispensable for growth in in vitro culture, has little or no impact on human-serum sensitivity. Our findings reveal major and novel determinants of human-serum sensitivity in T. b. brucei. They also shed light on the lysosomal protein-protein interactions that render T. b. brucei exquisitely sensitive to lytic factors in human serum, and indicate that CATL, an important potential drug target, has the capacity to resist these factors

    Quantitative and qualitative differences in the T cell response to HIV in uninfected Ugandans exposed or unexposed to HIV-infected partners.

    No full text
    HIV-exposed and yet persistently uninfected individuals have been an intriguing, repeated observation in multiple studies, but uncertainty persists on the significance and implications of this in devising protective strategies against HIV. We carried out a cross-sectional analysis of exposed uninfected partners in a Ugandan cohort of heterosexual serodiscordant couples (37.5% antiretroviral therapy naive) comparing their T cell responses to HIV peptides with those of unexposed uninfected individuals. We used an objective definition of exposure and inclusion criteria, blinded ex vivo and cultured gamma interferon (IFN-γ) enzyme-linked immunospot assays, and multiparameter flow cytometry and intracellular cytokine staining to investigate the features of the HIV-specific response in exposed versus unexposed uninfected individuals. A response rate to HIV was detectable in unexposed uninfected (5.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.3 to 8.1%) and, at a significantly higher level (12.5%, 95% CI = 9.7 to 15.4%, P = 0.0004), in exposed uninfected individuals. The response rate to Gag was significantly higher in exposed uninfected (10/50 [20.%]) compared to unexposed uninfected (1/35 [2.9%]) individuals (P = 0.0004). The magnitude of responses was also greater in exposed uninfected individuals but not statistically significant. The average number of peptide pools recognized was significantly higher in exposed uninfected subjects than in unexposed uninfected subjects (1.21 versus 0.47; P = 0.0106). The proportion of multifunctional responses was different in the two groups, with a higher proportion of single cytokine responses, mostly IFN-γ, in unexposed uninfected individuals compared to exposed uninfected individuals. Our findings demonstrate both quantitative and qualitative differences in T cell reactivity to HIV between HESN (HIV exposed seronegative) and HUSN (HIV unexposed seronegative) subject groups but do not discriminate as to whether they represent markers of exposure or of protection against HIV infection
    corecore