Evaluation of eight different bioinformatics tools to predict viral tropism in different human immunodeficiency virus type 1 subtypes

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) tropism can be assessed using phenotypic assays, but this is quite laborious, expensive, and time-consuming and can be made only in sophisticated laboratories. More accessible albeit reliable tools for testing of HIV-1 tropism are needed in view of the prompt introduction of CCR5 antagonists in clinical practice. Bioinformatics tools based on V3 sequences might help to predict HIV-1 tropism; however, most of these methods have been designed by taking only genetic information derived from HIV-1 subtype B into consideration. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performances of several genotypic tools to predict HIV-1 tropism in non-B subtypes, as data on this issue are scarce. Plasma samples were tested using a new phenotypic tropism assay (Phenoscript-tropism; Eurofins), and results were compared with estimates of coreceptor usage using eight different genotypic predictor softwares (Support Vector Machine [SVM], C4.5, C4.5 with positions 8 to 12 only, PART, Charge Rule, geno2pheno coreceptor, Position-Specific Scoring Matrix X4R5 [PSSMX4R5], and PSSMsinsi). A total of 150 samples were tested, with 115 belonging to patients infected with non-B subtypes and 35 drawn from subtype B-infected patients, which were taken as controls. When non-B subtypes were tested, the concordances between the results obtained using the phenotypic assay and distinct genotypic tools were as follows: 78.8% for SVM, 77.5% for C4.5, 82.5% for C4.5 with positions 8 to 12 only, 82.5% for PART, 82.5% for Charge Rule, 82.5% for PSSMX4R5, 83.8% for PSSMsinsi, and 71.3% for geno2pheno. When clade B viruses were tested, the best concordances were seen for PSSMX4R5 (91.4%), PSSMsinsi (88.6%), and geno2pheno (88.6%). The sensitivity for detecting X4 variants was lower for non-B than for B viruses, especially in the case of PSSMsinsi (38.4% versus 100%, respectively), SVMwetcat (46% versus 100%, respectively), and PART (30% versus 90%, respectively). In summary, while inferences of HIV-1 coreceptor usage using genotypic tools seem to be reliable for clade B viruses, their performances are poor for non-B subtypes, in which they particularly fail to detect X4 variants

HDAC 阻害剤は Diethylstilbestrol による性腺刺激ホルモン細胞からのプロラクチン細胞への分化転換を抑制する

Diethylstilbestrol (DES), an estrogen agonist, increases prolactin (PRL) cells through transdifferentiation of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) cells to PRL cells as well as proliferation of PRL cells in adult male mouse pituitary. Since hyperacetylation of histone H3 is implicated in the regulation of activation of various genes, we examined the effect of DES on the state of histone H3 acetylation. DES significantly reduced the immunohistochemical signal for acetylated histone H3 at lysine 9 (H3K9ac) in PRL, LH and FSH cells, but not for H3K18ac or H3K23ac. DES-treated mice were injected intraperitoneally with HDAC inhibitors (HDACi), sodium phenylbutyrate (NaPB) or valproic acid (VPA), to mimic the acetylation level of histone H3. As expected, HDACi treatment restored the level of H3K9ac expression in these cells, and also inhibited DES-induced increase in PRL cells. Furthermore, NaPB and VPA also abrogated the effects of DES on the population density of both LH and FSH cells. Similarly, the numbers of proliferating and apoptotic cells in the pituitary in NaPB- or VPA-treated mice were comparable to those of the control mice. Considered together, these results indicated that the acetylation level of histone H3 plays an important role in DES-induced transdifferentiation of LH to PRL cells as well as proliferation of PRL cells.長崎大学学位論文 学位記番号:博(医歯薬)甲第1128号 学位授与年月日:平成31年3月20日Author: Nandar Tun, Yasuaki Shibata, Myat Thu Soe, Myo Win Htun, Takehiko KojiCitation: Histochemistry and Cell Biology, 151(4), pp.291-303; 2018Nagasaki University (長崎大学)課程博

Epigenetic modulators as therapeutic targets in prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is one of the most common non-cutaneous malignancies among men worldwide. Epigenetic aberrations, including changes in DNA methylation patterns and/or histone modifications, are key drivers of prostate carcinogenesis. These epigenetic defects might be due to deregulated function and/or expression of the epigenetic machinery, affecting the expression of several important genes. Remarkably, epigenetic modifications are reversible and numerous compounds that target the epigenetic enzymes and regulatory proteins were reported to be effective in cancer growth control. In fact, some of these drugs are already being tested in clinical trials. This review discusses the most important epigenetic alterations in prostate cancer, highlighting the role of epigenetic modulating compounds in pre-clinical and clinical trials as potential therapeutic agents for prostate cancer management.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio