Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Public Library of Science
Résumé : International audience
Two of the crucial aspects of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection are (i) viral persistence in reservoirs (precluding viral eradication) and (ii) chronic inflammation (directly associated with all-cause morbidities in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-controlled HIV-infected patients). The objective of the present study was to assess the potential involvement of adipose tissue in these two aspects. Adipose tissue is composed of adipocytes and the stromal vascular fraction (SVF); the latter comprises immune cells such as CD4+ T cells and macrophages (both of which are important target cells for HIV). The inflammatory potential of adipose tissue has been extensively described in the context of obesity. During HIV infection, the inflammatory profile of adipose tissue has been revealed by the occurrence of lipodystrophies (primarily related to ART). Data on the impact of HIV on the SVF (especially in individuals not receiving ART) are scarce. We first analyzed the impact of simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) infection on abdominal subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissues in SIVmac251 infected macaques and found that both adipocytes and adipose tissue immune cells were affected. The adipocyte density was elevated, and adipose tissue immune cells presented enhanced immune activation and/or inflammatory profiles. We detected cell-associated SIV DNA and RNA in the SVF and in sorted CD4+ T cells and macrophages from adipose tissue. We demonstrated that SVF cells (including CD4+ T cells) are infected in ART-controlled HIV-infected patients. Importantly, the production of HIV RNA was detected by in situ hybridization, and after the in vitro reactivation of sorted CD4+ T cells from adipose tissue. We thus identified adipose tissue as a crucial cofactor in both viral persistence and chronic immune activation/inflammation during HIV infection. These observations open up new therapeutic strategies for limiting the size of the viral reservoir and decreasing low-grade chronic inflammation via the modulation of adipose tissue-related pathways
ISSN: 1553-7366

Droits : http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
hal-01207287
https://hal-univ-rennes1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01207287
https://hal-univ-rennes1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01207287/document
https://hal-univ-rennes1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01207287/file/journal.ppat.1005153.pdf
DOI : 10.1371/journal.ppat.1005153

Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Oxford University Press (OUP)
Résumé : International audience
OBJECTIVES: To compare virological effectiveness in patients who continued on a virologically successful first-line boosted protease inhibitor (PI)-containing combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) regimen or who switched to a PI-free cART including efavirenz, nevirapine or abacavir. METHODS: From the French Hospital Database on HIV, we selected 439 patients with undetectable viral load (VL) on a first-line boosted PI-containing cART regimen who switched to a PI-free combination including efavirenz, nevirapine or abacavir. Each of these patients was matched with three patients who continued to take their first-line cART regimen, on the basis of gender, age, CD4 cell count, VL, date of cART initiation and the duration of VL undetectability. Time to virological failure (VF) was analysed with Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox models. RESULTS: The 12 month probabilities of VF were 3.7% and 5.7% in non-switch and switch patients, respectively, and 3.9%, 7.2% and 9.0% in patients switching to efavirenz-, nevirapine- and abacavir-containing cART, respectively. After adjustment, only patients switching to abacavir-containing cART had a higher risk of VF than non-switch patients (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.99; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-3.79). CONCLUSIONS: Switching from a virologically successful first-line boosted PI-containing cART regimen to a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-containing cART regimen containing either efavirenz or nevirapine is virologically safe, while switching to abacavir-containing cART should be avoided.
ISSN: 0305-7453

hal-00875284
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00875284
DOI : 10.1093/jac/dkr208
PUBMED : 21636583

Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Landes Bioscience
Résumé : International audience
In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
Autophagy

hal-00735751
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00735751
PUBMED : 22966490