Department of Molecular Biophysics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520-8064, USA.
J Virol. 2011 Jun;85(11):5628-43. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02659-10. Epub 2011 Mar 16.
Diverse stimuli reactivate the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) lytic cycle in Burkitt lymphoma (BL) cells. In HH514-16 BL cells, two histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors, sodium butyrate (NaB) and trichostatin A (TSA), and the DNA methyltransferase inhibitor azacytidine (AzaCdR) promote lytic reactivation. Valproic acid (VPA), which, like NaB, belongs to the short-chain fatty acid class of HDAC inhibitors, fails to induce the EBV lytic cycle in these cells. Nonetheless, VPA behaves as an HDAC inhibitor; it causes hyperacetylation of histone H3 (J. K. Countryman, L. Gradoville, and G. Miller, J. Virol. 82:4706-4719, 2008). Here we show that VPA blocked the induction of EBV early lytic proteins ZEBRA and EA-D in response to NaB, TSA, or AzaCdR. The block in lytic activation occurred prior to the accumulation of BZLF1 transcripts. Reactivation of EBV in Akata cells, in response to anti-IgG, and in Raji cells, in response to tetradecanoyl phorbol acetate (TPA), was also inhibited by VPA. MS-275 and apicidin, representing two additional classes of HDAC inhibitors, and suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) reactivated EBV in HH514-16 cells; this activity was also inhibited by VPA. Although VPA potently blocked the expression of viral lytic-cycle transcripts, it did not generally block the transcription of cellular genes and was not toxic. The levels and kinetics of specific cellular transcripts, such as Stat3, Frmd6, Mad1, Sepp1, c-fos, c-jun, and egr1, which were activated by NaB and TSA, were similar in HH514-16 cells treated with VPA. When combined with NaB or TSA, VPA did not inhibit the activation of these cellular genes. Changes in cellular gene expression in response to VPA, NaB, or TSA were globally similar as assessed by human genome arrays; however, VPA selectively stimulated the expression of some cellular genes, such as MEF2D, YY1, and ZEB1, that could repress the EBV lytic cycle. We describe a novel example of functional antagonism between HDAC inhibitors.
多种刺激因素可使 EBV 在伯基特淋巴瘤(BL)细胞中重新激活裂解周期。HH514-16 BL 细胞中,两种组蛋白去乙酰化酶(HDAC)抑制剂——丁酸钠(NaB)和曲古抑菌素 A(TSA)以及 DNA 甲基转移酶抑制剂阿扎胞苷(AzaCdR)能促进裂解再激活。丙戊酸(VPA)与 NaB 同属短链脂肪酸类 HDAC 抑制剂,也未能诱导这些细胞中的 EBV 裂解周期。尽管如此,VPA 仍表现为 HDAC 抑制剂,它能引起组蛋白 H3 的乙酰化(J. K. Countryman、L. Gradoville 和 G. Miller,J. Virol. 82:4706-4719,2008)。在此,我们发现 VPA 能阻断 NaB、TSA 或 AzaCdR 诱导的 EBV 早期裂解蛋白 ZEBRA 和 EA-D 的表达。裂解激活的阻断发生在 BZLF1 转录本积累之前。VPA 还能抑制 Akata 细胞中针对抗 IgE 的 EBV 再激活和 Raji 细胞中针对十四烷酰佛波醇乙酸酯(TPA)的 EBV 再激活。代表另外两类 HDAC 抑制剂的 MS-275 和 apicidin,以及 suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid(SAHA)能在 HH514-16 细胞中重新激活 EBV;这种活性也被 VPA 抑制。尽管 VPA 能强烈阻断病毒裂解周期转录本的表达,但它一般不会阻断细胞基因的转录,也没有毒性。在 VPA 处理的 HH514-16 细胞中,Stat3、Frmd6、Mad1、Sepp1、c-fos、c-jun 和 egr1 等特定细胞转录本的水平和动力学与 NaB 和 TSA 激活的相似。当与 NaB 或 TSA 联合使用时,VPA 不会抑制这些细胞基因的激活。通过人类基因组芯片评估,VPA、NaB 或 TSA 引起的细胞基因表达变化在整体上是相似的;然而,VPA 选择性地刺激了一些细胞基因的表达,如 MEF2D、YY1 和 ZEB1,它们可能会抑制 EBV 裂解周期。我们描述了一种 HDAC 抑制剂之间功能拮抗的新实例。