Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Oct 22.
Published in final edited form as: Immunity. 2018 May 15;48(5):872–895. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2018.04.030

Targeting the latent reservoir for HIV-1

Srona Sengupta 1,2, Robert F Siliciano 1,3
PMCID: PMC6196732  NIHMSID: NIHMS991492  PMID: 29768175

Abstract

Antiretroviral therapy can effectively block HIV-1 viral replication and prevent or reverse immunodeficiency in HIV-1-infected individuals. However, viral replication resumes within weeks of treatment interruption. The major barrier to cure is a small pool of resting memory CD4+ T cells that harbor latent HIV-1 proviruses. This latent reservoir is now the focus of an intense international research effort. We describe how the reservoir is established, challenges involved in eliminating it, and pharmacologic and immunologic strategies for targeting this reservoir. The development of a successful cure strategy will likely require understanding the mechanisms that maintain HIV-1 proviruses in a latent state and pathways that drive the proliferation of infected cells, which slows reservoir decay. In addition, cure will require the development of effective immunologic approaches to eliminating infected cells. There is renewed optimism about the prospect of a cure, and the interventions discussed here may pave the way.

eTOC blurb:

Developing a cure for HIV-1 requires understanding the mechanisms of HIV-1 persistence in the latent reservoir. In this review, we discuss historical and recent paradigms in the HIV-1 persistence field as well novel immunologic and pharmacologic strategies to eliminate this reservoir.

Introduction: The case for an HIV-1 cure

In 1983, a ~9.7 kb retrovirus later termed human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) was discovered as the causative agent for an emerging fatal immunodeficiency syndrome (Barré-Sinoussi et al., 1983). This acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) developed in infected individuals years after initial infection. Sensitive assays for HIV-1 RNA in the plasma (Piatak et al. 1993) revealed that viral replication continues throughout the course of untreated infection, driving the loss of CD4+ T cells which is the central cause of the immunodeficiency (Mellors et al. 1996). The urgent need for therapies led to the relatively rapid development of drugs that block sequential steps in the virus life cycle including attachment of the virus particle to CD4 and CCR5 on the T cell surface (CCR5 antagonists), fusion of the viral envelope with the plasma membrane (fusion inhibitors), reverse transcription of genomic viral RNA into double stranded DNA (nucleoside and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors), integration of viral DNA into the host cell genome (integrase inhibitors), and maturation of virus particles released following their assembly from nascent viral RNA and proteins (protease inhibitors). In 1997, combinations of three antiretroviral drugs were shown to durably suppress viremia to below the limit of detection of clinical assays (Perelson et al. 1997), consistent with a complete arrest in viral replication (Ho et al. 1995, Wei et al. 1995). The remarkable efficacy of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) reflects unique pharmacologic attributes that may also apply to the direct acting antiviral drugs that can cure Hepatitis C infection in 12 weeks (Laskey and Siliciano, 2014; Koizumi et al. 2017) However, despite its remarkable efficacy, cART does not cure HIV-1 infection, and viremia rebounds within weeks of treatment interruption (Davey et al. 1999; Chun et al. 1999). This reflects the fact that, unlike Hepatitis C, HIV-1 can establish a state of latency in some infected cells.

The ability of human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) to remain quiescent in a latent reservoir in long-lived memory CD4+ T cells is the main barrier to cure (Chun et al. 1995; Chun et al. 1997a; Chun et al. 1997b; Finzi et al. 1997; Wong et al. 1997). In HIV+ individuals on combination antiretroviral therapy (cART), the primary indication of persistent HIV-1 infection is integrated viral DNA within the genomes of resting CD4+ T cells (Chun et al. 1995). Expression of viral RNA and proteins is limited while the cells remain in a resting state. Infected resting CD4+ T cells are essentially indistinguishable from uninfected cells, and therefore are not eliminated by cytolytic effectors. Quiescence, however, is not permanent, and cells containing viral genomes can be reactivated, leading to virus production (Hill et al. 2014). Upon cessation of cART, the stochastic reactivation of even a single latently infected CD4+ T cell can result in virion production, infection of other CD4+T cells, and subsequent exponential viral rebound. In most HIV+ individuals, viremia becomes measurable within two weeks of treatment interruption (Davey et al. 1999; Chun et al. 1999). The latent reservoir decays slowly, with a t½ of 3.6 years, so even prolonged cART cannot to eradicate the infection in a patient’s lifetime (Finzi 1999; Siliciano et al. 2003; Strain et al. 2003; Crooks et al. 2015). Even in HIV+ individuals who are treated early or who have extremely small reservoirs as a result of bone marrow transplantation, rebound can occur, and therefore these individuals must stay on cART indefinitely (Chun et al. 1999; Kaufmann et al. 2004; Persaud et al. 2013; Henrich et al. 2014; Luzuriaga et al. 2015).

Although cART is effective in reducing viremia to below the detection limit of clinical assays and reversing or preventing immunodeficiency, it has some side effects and is challenging to deliver in resource-poor areas. In non-adherent HIV+ individuals, HIV-1 variants with drug resistance mutations evolve (Larder et al. 1989). Moreover, despite advances in HIV-1 treatment and prevention, the global rate of new infections has held steady, at ~2 million new infections per year (UNAIDS 2016 and 2017), adding continuously to the number of people requiring lifelong treatment. Therefore, an HIV-1 cure is urgently needed.

Cure efforts have focused on the “shock and kill” strategy for purging the reservoir (Archin et al. 2014). Reversing latency (“shock”) to allow expression of viral gene products should allow for the “kill” phase in which infected cells are eliminated by viral cytopathic effects, for example through Vpr-mediated cycle arrest and apoptosis (Poon et al. 1998; Stewart et al. 2000) or by HIV-1-specific cytolytic T lymphocytes (CTL). Such a strategy would be carried out while HIV+ individuals remain on cART to prevent new infection events. Modeling studies suggest that a reservoir reduction of >4 logs would be required to achieve a cure (i.e. no viral rebound after withdrawal of cART) in 50% of HIV+ individuals (Hill et al. 2014). Thus a strong reactivation stimulus and efficient targeted killing of infected cells are necessary. Importantly, the reactivation stimulus would ideally induce HIV-1 expression without causing global T cell activation, which is toxic (Prins et al. 1999; Kulkosky et al. 2002). Numerous small molecule latency-reversing agents (LRAs) have been identified for this purpose, often using in vitro models of HIV-1 latency (Yang et al. 2009). Some have been tested in cART-treated HIV+ individuals (Archin et al. 2012; Søgaard et al. 2015), in cART-treated macaques infected with simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) (Borducchi et al. 2016) or in HIV-1-infected humanized mice on cART (Halper-Stromberg et al. 2014). A few studies have reported transient increases in cell-associated RNA consistent with latency reversal in vivo (Archin et al. 2012), while other studies have seen increases in viral RNA in plasma (Søgaard et al. 2015). Still, evidence for a clear reduction in the latent reservoir is lacking (Cillo et al. 2014). One concern is that simply reactivating latently infected cells may not lead to cell death (Shan et al. 2012). Killing of infected cells by CTL or other cytolytic effector cells may be required. However, multiple questions remain, including which viral antigens are presented by latently infected cells after induction and whether CTL or NK cells can effectively recognize and kill these cells. In this review, we discuss the current understanding of mechanisms of HIV-1 persistence, as well as strategies to pharmacologically and immunologically limit this persistence, with a particular focus on the “kill” aspect of “shock and kill” strategies.

A historical perspective

By the late 1990s, several studies had shown that HIV-1 gene expression could be upregulated upon T cell activation through inducible host transcription factors such as NFκB and NFAT (Nabel and Baltimore 1987; Kinoshita et al. 1998). These factors promote viral transcription upon binding to the HIV-1 promoter sequence, or long terminal repeat (LTR) (Nabel and Baltimore 1987; Siekevitz et al. 1987; Böhnlein et al. 1988; Duh et al. 1989; Kinoshita et al. 1998). Therefore, it seemed likely that low or absent HIV-1 gene expression representative of viral latency could occur in resting but not activated CD4+ T cells. Indeed, by 1995, one study had shown that activating resting memory CD4+T cells from HIV+ individuals could induce the release of replication-competent HIV-1 (Chun et al. 1995).

The importance of this discovery only became apparent with the development of cART. cART blocks new infection events but not virus production from cells that already have an integrated provirus. If the block is complete, decreases in viremia following initiation of cART reflect the decay rate of productively infected cells. Seminal studies by the laboratories of David Ho and George Shaw showed that the major population of virus-producing cells decays rapidly, with a t1/2 of <1 day (Ho et al. 1995; Wei et al. 1995; Perelson et al. 1997). A second compartment of cells, which may represent recently infected cells infected with unintegrated HIV-1 (Blankson et al. 2000), decays with a t1/2 of 14 days (Perelson et al. 1997). In HIV+ individuals on optimal cART, the decay of both of these compartments reduces viremia to below the limit of detection of clinical assays (Figure 1), initially suggesting that these compartments may contain all infected cells (Perelson et al. 1997). If this were true, then treatment for 2–3 years would be curative (Perelson et al. 1997). The finding that rebound is observed in the vast majority of HIV+ individuals who stop treatment, regardless of the time on cART, indicates that there is a third cellular compartment that serves as a long-lived reservoir of infected cells.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Viral dynamics in the presence of cART and curative interventions. (Top) Plasma HIV-1 RNA levels in typical patient. Clinical assays detect HIV-1 virions in the plasma through measurement of genomic HIV-1 RNA by quantitative RT-PCR. Each virion has two copies of the viral genome. Viremia increases exponentially after exposure, peaking at around two weeks post infection. Levels of plasma virus then fall, coincident with the development of a CTL response, to a steady state level (the set point). Viral replication continues through the course of untreated HIV-1 infection, driving CD4+ T cell depletion. cART produces a rapid biphasic decay in viremia to below the limit of detection of clinical assays (50 copies of HIV-1 RNA/ml of plasma), reflecting the short half-lives of two major populations of productively infected cells. However, residual viremia of ~1 copy/ml persists. Treatment intensification by addition of a fourth antiretroviral drug does not reduce residual viremia indicating that it is not due to ongoing cycles of replication but rather release of virus from long-lived latently infected cells that become activated. Nevertheless, with good adherence, infected individuals can expect continued suppression of viral replication and a near normal life span. Upon treatment interruption, viremia rebound rapidly, becoming clinically detectable within weeks of interruption and rising exponentially to the previous set point. (Middle) Effects of a hypothetical cure strategy in involving LRAs. LRAs may induce transient increases in plasma HIV-1 RNA as a result of the induction of viral gene expression from latently infected cells. If the virus producing cells die from viral cytopathic effects or are eliminated by immune mechanisms, then the reservoir will be reduced. This will be reflected in a reduction in the level of residual viremia and a delay in rebound following cART interruption, the length of which is related to the degree of reservoir reduction (Hill et al. 2014). A sterilizing cure requires complete reservoir elimination. (Bottom) Hypothetical vaccine strategies that enhance HIV-1-specific immunity to a degree that allows long-term control of HIV-1 replication would convert HIV+ individuals with progressive disease into EC and produce a functional cure.

Resting memory cells, already shown to harbor quiescent but inducible HIV-1 (Chun et al. 1995; Chun et al. 1997a) were a clear candidate for this long-lived reservoir. In 1997, three groups showed that replication-competent HIV-1 could indeed be induced from resting memory CD4+ T cells from HIV+ individuals on long-term cART (Chun et al. 1997b; Finzi et al. 1997; Wong et al. 1997). While the cells are in a resting state, HIV-1 is maintained as latent but inducible proviruses, and no virus is produced without some activating stimulus (Chun et al. 1995; Finzi et al. 1997; Wong et al. 1997). This population of infected cells became known as the latent reservoir.

In discussions of reservoirs and HIV-1 persistence, definitions are important. Latency can be defined as a reversible non-productive state of infection of individual cells, and a reservoir can be defined as a cell type that allows longer-term persistence of replication-competent virus in the setting of optimal cART. Several recent studies have revealed important features of persistent HIV-1 that directly impact our understanding of the latent reservoir. Full viral genome sequencing studies have shown that over 93% of proviruses in resting CD4+T cells in HIV+ individuals on cART are defective (Ho et al. 2013; Bruner et al. 2016; Imamichi et al. 2016; Hiener et al. 2017; Lee et al. 2017). These defective proviruses contain large internal deletions and/or hypermutation mediated by APOBEC3G, a host enzyme that deaminates dC to dU on the minus strand of HIV-1 cDNA during reverse transcription (resulting in a G to A hypermutation). For most defective proviruses, the defects are so severe that viral replication is precluded (Ho et al. 2013; Bruner et al. 2016). Therefore, measurements of latently infected cells via standard PCR analysis of proviral DNA do not accurately capture the relevant reservoir of replication-competent HIV-1 that can cause viral rebound upon treatment interruption (Bruner et al. 2016). In this review, we thus define the latent reservoir as a long-lived population of resting (i.e. possessing a longer half-life than activated) CD4+ T cells that harbors replication-competent HIV-1 in HIV+ individuals on optimal cART. Other potential reservoirs are also discussed at the end of this review.

Latency induction and seeding of the reservoir

How HIV-1 establishes latent infection in memory CD4+ T cells has been unclear. Multiple models exist, but the simplest explanation is that latency is an accident of timing, as is discussed below. Memory cells are long-lived, and latency would appear to be a means to prolong HIV-1 survival in vivo through immunoevasion, as in the case of herpesviruses. However, unlike herpesviruses, HIV-1 replicates continuously throughout the course of untreated infection (Piatak et al. 1993), evading the adaptive immune response via rapid mutations in antibody and CTL epitopes (Borrow et al. 1997; Price et al. 1997; Wei et al. 2002; Kwong et al. 2002) (Figure 1). This it is not immediately apparent why HIV-1 established latent infection in resting memory CD4+ T cells. HIV-1 does not readily infect these cells, due to low expression of the co-receptor CCR5 needed for viral entry (Pierson et al. 2000) and a reduction in dNTPs needed for reverse transcription resulting from the dNTPase activity of the restriction factor SAMHD1 (Goldstone et al. 2011; Baldauf et al. 2012). Abortive infection of resting CD4+ T cells can occur and may lead to cell death (Doitsh et al. 2010). In addition, infection of resting CD4+ T cells that have been rendered permissive by exposure to chemokines in tissue sites may lead to latency (Saleh et al, 2007). However, the most likely explanation for HIV-1 latency involves viral tropism for activated CD4+ T cells. T cell activation upregulates the CCR5 co-receptor, so activated CD4+T cells are readily infected by HIV-1. Normally productive infection rapidly leads to cell death (Wei et al. 1995; Bleul et al. 1997; Gornalusse et al. 2015). However, infection of activated CD4+ T cells that are reverting to a resting memory state, or effector-to-memory transitioning (EMT) cells, provides the best conditions for the establishment of latency due to high CCR5 expression, adequate dNTP pools for reverse transcription, and reduced viral gene expression due to the sequestration of activation-dependent host transcription factors (i.e. NFκB and NFAT) (Shan et al. 2017). For cells in this state, steps in the viral life cycle from entry to integration can proceed, but gene expression from the integrated provirus is minimal and transient (Figure 2). Thus these cells are more likely to escape viral cytopathic effects and immune effector mechanisms and enter a state of latent infection. In other words, a rare “perfect storm” of events seems to allow for successful viral infection and integration without cell death.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Proposed mechanism for the establishment of latent infection in resting CD4+ T cells. (A) Fate of resting CD4+ T cells following antigen (Ag) driven activation (horizontal axis) and following HIV-1 infection at times after activation (vertical axis). (B) Permissiveness of CD4+ T cells to different steps in the HIV-1 life cycle as a function of time after T cell activation. Resting CD4+ T cells are relatively resistant to HIV-1 infection due to low expression of the CCR5 coreceptor and reduced levels of dNTPs required for DNA synthesis during reverse transcription. Following activation, upregulation of the CCR5 allows viral entry. Levels of dNTPs increase allowing reverse transcription, and key host transcription factors translocate to the nucleus allowing viral gene expression and productive infection. Activated CD4+ T in a state of productive infection die rapidly. At 6–9 days after activation, CCR5 levels are high and dNTP levels are adequate for reverse transcription. However, viral gene expression is minimal and transient due to falling levels of activation dependent host transcription factors. Thus infection of cells during the effector to memory transition can result in latent infection. (C) Yield of latently infected cells following infection at different times after T cell activation. Model is based on experiments described in Shan et al., 2017.

This model also provides an explanation for the low frequency of latently infected cells in vivo. Even in the uninfected state, very few activated CD4+T cells progress to a memory state, with most cells dying during the contraction phase of the immune response. With HIV-1 infection, even fewer activated CD4+ T cells may escape viral cytopathic effects and host immune targeting to revert to a memory phenotype, and only rare infection of EMT cells provides the synergistic conditions that allow for the establishment of latency (Shan et al. 2017). As determined by the limiting dilution quantitative virus outgrowth assay (Q-VOA), the frequency of latently infected cells in HIV+ individuals is .03–3 infectious units per million (IUPM) resting CD4+ T cells (Siliciano et al. 2003). This extremely low frequency of latently infected cells has made biochemical studies of the reservoir challenging. While seeding of the reservoir is infrequent, the high level of viral replication during acute infection allows for latency to be established very early after infection. Studies using SIV have shown that a reservoir is formed within three days of mucosal infection (Whitney et al. 2014). Early studies estimated that a latent HIV-1 reservoir of 105–107 cells is established in most individuals during the first weeks of infection (Chun et al. 1997a; Chun et al. 1998).

Challenges of reservoir reduction

The natural longevity of memory CD4+ T cells (Takaki et al. 2000; Hammarlund et al. 2010) suggested that latent HIV-1 could persist in HIV+ individuals on cART – but for how long? Early studies on 62 HIV+ individuals on cART for up to seven showed that the half-life of this population of cells is 43.9 months or ~3.7 years (Siliciano et al. 2003). At this rate, a population of 1 million latently infected cells would take 73.4 years to naturally decay to zero, preventing cure in most infected individuals. Recent longitudinal studies of HIV+ individuals on newer cART regimens found a similar decay rate (t½ = 3.6 years) (Crooks et al. 2015), suggesting that newer regimens do not hasten decay. Cure through reservoir elimination is referred to as a sterilizing cure (Figure 1). This differs from a functional cure, in which the reservoir remains but the immune system is modified to allow long-term control of viral replication without cART. There is a subset of untreated HIV+ individuals known as “elite controllers” (EC) whose immune response can control viremia to clinically undetectable levels (Lambotte et al. 2005; Shasha & Walker 2013; Migueles & Connors 2015; O’Connell et al. 2009). Pathogenic, replication-competent HIV-1 can be isolated from these individuals, but interestingly, their latent reservoirs are 1.5 logs smaller than those in most other infected individuals (Blankson et al. 2007). While the mechanisms of elite control remain incompletely understood, it is possible that superior CTL responses may limit seeding of the reservoir and allow enhanced decay of infected populations that become reactivated (Migueles & Connors 2015). The example of elite controllers is relevant to HIV-1 cure because it suggests that in addition to reversing viral latency, it will be important to enhance immune recognition of HIV-1-infected cells. Of note, mathematical models suggest that these functional cure strategies should be combined with strategies aiming to purge the reservoir for the greatest likelihood of clinical benefit (Conway & Perelson 2015).

Several informative “near cure” cases directly illustrate the challenge of eradicating the HIV-1 reservoir. Two individuals known as the “Boston patients” received allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCTs) for treatment of hematological malignancies while they remained on cART. This resulted in reservoir reductions of >2-logs. After interruption of cART, the patients experienced a long cART-free remission until sudden viral rebound at 3 and 8 months. Thus, reservoir reduction increased time to rebound (normally 2 weeks), but was not curative (Henrich et al. 2014). In the case of the “Mississippi Child,” a perinatally infected infant who received cART from 30 hours to 18 months of age, plasma virus levels remained below the limit of detection for more than 2 years after cART interruption (Persaud et al. 2013). The frequency of latently infected cells in this child was at least 2.5 logs lower than in a typical treated adult, but the child experienced sudden viral rebound 27.6 months after cART discontinuation (Luzuriaga et al. 2015; Hill et al. 2016). What is particularly interesting in these “near cure” cases is that the HIV+ individuals had very little adaptive immunity to HIV-1, either as a result of the transplant process or very early treatment (Henrich et al. 2014; Persaud et al. 2013). Without an immune response or antiretroviral drugs, there is nothing to hold viral replication in check. The long, ART-free remissions observed in these HIV+ individuals can only be explained by the persistence of a non-replicating form of the virus in a small number of latently infected cells (Figure 1).

In the only known case of an HIV-1 cure, Timothy Ray Brown (the “Berlin patient”) underwent a myeloablative HSCT from a donor homozygous for a 32-base pair deletion in the ccr5 gene (CCR5Δ32) followed by cART interruption (Hütter et al. 2009). CD4+ T cells lacking a functional CCR5 receptor are resistant to infection by the CCR5-tropic (R5) HIV-1 that is responsible for most sexually transmitted cases of infection. An aggressive conditioning regimen and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) resulted in complete or near-complete replacement of recipient immune cells with donor cells. This, together with the resistance of donor cells to HIV-1 infection, likely led to treatment success. Reservoir assays suggested that a > 3.5-log reservoir reduction occurred (Yukl et al. 2014; Hill et al. 2016). Now eleven years off cART, Mr. Brown has not experienced viral rebound, and all attempts to detect residual HIV-1 have failed (Yukl et al. 2014).

These cases illustrate that a multi-log reduction in the reservoir will be required to prevent rebound. It is likely that a combination of repeated interventions that induce latency reversal, cART to prevent viral spread, and cytolytic effector cell killing of productively infected cells will be needed. In this review, we discuss three major issues that we believe must be addressed for a successful cure strategy: the mechanisms that maintain latency, the clonal expansion of infected cells, and immune targeting of HIV-1-infected cells.

Mechanisms of HIV-1 latency

A hallmark of latently infected cells is an integrated but transcriptionally silent HIV-1 provirus (Hermankova et al. 2003). High HIV-1 gene expression leads to a productively infected state, and cells in this state have a short half-life, partly due to the cytopathic effects of viral gene products (Wei et al. 1995; Perelson et al. 1997). How then is broad-scale repression of viral gene expression achieved? Mechanisms of HIV-1 latency have been described in other recent reviews (Peterlin & Price 2006; Karn 2011; van Lint et al. 2013; Dahabieh et al. 2015) and are only summarized here. Many studies have demonstrated that stable latency can arise from repressive chromatin states, including obstructive nucleosome positioning (Verdin et al. 1993; Van Lint et al. 1996), DNA methylation (Kauder et al. 2009), and posttranslational modifications of histones and non-histone proteins (Van Lint et al. 1996; Coull et al. 2000; Hsia & Shi 2002; Chan & Greene 2011; Williams et al. 2006). Other mechanisms contributing to stable latency are low levels of host transcription factors (Coiras et al. 2009) and the HIV-1 Tat protein (Karn 2011), transcriptional interference (Lenasi et al. 2008), and defects in RNA splicing and export (Lassen et al. 2006). It is important to bear in mind that most HIV-1 proviruses in the resting CD4+ T cells of individuals on cART are defective and should not be considered part of the latent reservoir (Ho et al. 2013; Bruner et al. 2016). The presence of an excess of defective proviruses complicates measurement of the latent reservoir and molecular analysis of HIV-1 latency.

Resting CD4+ T cells contain high levels of condensed heterochromatin that limit gene expression (Festenstein et al. 2003; Tamaru 2010). Early studies tested the hypothesis that HIV-1 integrates within heterochromatin and that this suppresses gene expression. Indeed, in the J-lat cell line, an elegant cell line model of HIV-1 latency, some proviruses were found in heterochromatin-rich regions of the human genome and could produce viral mRNA when induced by phorbyl esters and TNFα (Jordan et al. 2001). Studies in a an infected SupT1 cell line, however, showed that HIV-1 integrates predominantly within transcribed genes, or euchromatin (Schröder et al. 2002). In vivo analysis of CD4+ T cells from HIV+ individuals on cART confirmed these latter findings and showed that 93% of integration events occur in the introns of actively transcribed genes (Han et al. 2008). This phenomenon results partly from the host factor LEDGF/p75, which binds to HIV-1 integrase and directs HIV-1 integration within active genes (Ciuffi et al. 2005; Meehan et al. 2009). The surprising finding that HIV-1 can maintain a state of latency while integrated into actively transcribed host genes suggested that epigenetic silencing must occur through cis-acting elements that are dominant over the active chromatin state of the host gene.

An integrated HIV-1 provirus contains identical 5’ and 3’ LTRs. While both LTRs can promote transcription, the 5’ LTR serves as the HIV-1 promoter (Ne et al. 2018). The LTR contains an enhancer, core promoter, and trans-activation response (TAR) region (Ne et al. 2018). Cis- and trans-acting elements interact with the 5’ LTR, allowing HIV-1 transcription to elegantly synergize with T cell activation and proceed in two stages. Low level-transcription occurs upon integration and is mediated by the inducible host transcription factors, NFκB, NFAT, and AP-1, which bind to the viral enhancer (tat-independent phase) (Nabel and Baltimore 1987; Kinoshita et al. 1998). These factors are sequestered in the cytosol under resting conditions, but upon T cell activation, they can translocate to the nucleus, bind to the 5’ LTR, and promote viral transcription by recruiting RNA Pol II and transcriptional coactivators such as p300/CBP (Molitor et al. 1990; Gerritsen et al. 1997). Once the viral tat gene is expressed through this early low-level transcription, Tat can bind to the 5’ end of nascent RNA transcripts and further activate transcription by favoring elongation (tat-dependent phase) (Sodroski et al. 1985; Kao et al. 1987). Major blocks to HIV-1 gene expression thus arise from the natural physiology of the resting memory CD4+ T cells that compose the long-lived latent reservoir. In these cells, active forms of the key host transcription factors are present at only very low levels.

In addition to the lack of host factors important in the initiation of HIV-1 transcription, repressive epigenetic elements impede transcription initiation. For example, two nucleosomes, nuc-0 and nuc-1, consistently form within the 5’ LTR even when HIV-1 is integrated in euchromatin (Verdin et al. 1993) and block host transcriptional machinery. The fact that histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors can remodel nuc-1 (Laughlin et al. 1993; Van Lint et al. 1996; El Kharroubi et al. 1998) and that NFκB and other DNA-binding proteins can recruit HDAC1 to the LTR (Coull et al. 2000) suggests that histone acetylation controls the position of these nucleosomes. In another example, some studies suggest that DNA methylation at CpG islands near the transcription start site of the 5’ LTR may allow recruitment of transcriptional repressors (Kauder et al. 2009), although LTR methylation is not prominent in cells from HIV+ individuals (Ho et al. 2013).

Transcription of HIV-1 in resting CD4+ T cells is also blocked at the level of elongation, due to low levels of HIV-1 Tat and the host transcription factor P-TEFb (a complex of cyclin T1 and CDK9) (Cary et al., 2016; Budhiraja et al., 2013). Tat enhances HIV-1 expression by relieving promoter proximal pausing after transcriptional initiation. Specifically, Tat binds to a TAR mRNA hairpin structure found at the 5’ end of all nascent viral mRNA that is encoded by the TAR element of the 5’LTR (Feng et al., 1988). The Tat-TAR complex recruits P-TEFb (Zhu et al. 1997; Mancebo et al. 1997; Wei et al. 1998; Peng et al. 1998), which can then phosphorylate RNA Pol II, releasing the transcriptional machinery from paused transcription elongation (Parada & Roeder 1996; Bieniasz et al. 1999; Fujinaga et al. 2004). In addition, P-TEFb helps prevent premature Pol II release at terminator sequences (Bourgeois et al. 2002). Furthermore, in the absence of Tat, P-TEFb can clear negative regulatory proteins that bind to the LTR and prevent efficient transcription elongation, and can recruit TATA box binding protein (TBP) to the LTR (Raha et al. 2005). As these processes lead to more tat transcripts and protein, Tat initiates an explosive positive feedback loop of viral gene expression. Given the contribution of Tat and P-TEFb to high HIV-1 transcription, the relative absence of Tat and P-TEFb in resting cells from HIV+ individuals may promote HIV-1 latency (Karn 2011; Rice 2017). Along these lines, Tat would appear to be an ideal LRA. However, delivery is a challenge and its linker functions would be difficult to mimic with cell permeable small molecules.

Even if HIV-1 transcriptional initiation and elongation are successful, productive viral gene expression may not occur. As discussed, HIV-1 primarily integrates into the introns of actively transcribed genes and is therefore likely subject to transcriptional interference. The type of interference depends on the orientation of HIV-1 relative to the host gene (Han et al. 2008, Lenasi et al. 2008). In a primary cell model of latency, HIV-1 appeared to show a slight preference for integration in the same orientation to that of the host gene (Shan et al., 2011). In such a scenario, an upstream elongating RNA Pol II may displace key transcription factors on the HIV-1 LTR and maintain viral latency. If HIV-1 is oriented in the opposite polarity to that of the host gene, collision of opposing RNA Pol II complexes may occur, causing reduction of one or both transcripts, as well as RNAi and antisense RNA production (Lenasi et al. 2008).

In addition to these distinct mechanisms, there is stochasticity in HIV-1 transcription. This is likely due to the fact that individual cells differ in metabolic states, stage in the cell cycle, levels of P-TEFb, and other factors collectively termed “noise” (Ne et al. 2018). However, after reaching a threshold level, Tat can amplify one outcome (viral reactivation) in a feed-forward loop (Weinberger & Burnett 2005). This stochasticity may partly explain why not all proviruses in the latent reservoir are induced upon one round of maximal T cell activation (Ho et al. 2013; Hosmane et al. 2017). This stochasticity has motivated a search for agents that can modulate the “noise,” with the idea that agents that increase noise may synergize with latency reversal therapies to promote viral gene expression (Dar et al. 2014).

Latency reversing strategies

Several avenues for identifying LRAs have been explored. The reservoir was originally demonstrated using T cell activation to reverse latency, and so early studies sought to reverse latency using the cytokine IL-2 and a T cell receptor (TCR) agonist, murine monoclonal antibody to CD3. These agents caused severe toxicities without reducing the latent reservoir (Prins et al. 1999; Kulkosky et al. 2002), a finding which prompted the field to investigate LRAs that did not induce global T cell activation (Richman et al. 2009). A major problem is that drug screens using in vitro models of HIV-1 latency identify candidate LRAs that generally fail to reverse latency in ex vivo studies with cells from HIV+ individuals (Bullen et al. 2014). To date, the field has focused on LRAs targeting epigenetic mechanisms of latency, including HDAC inhibitors (Lehrman et al. 2005; Archin et al. 2012; Elliott et al. 2014; Rasmussen et al. 2014; Søgaard et al. 2015), methylation inhibitors (Bouchat et al. 2015), and bromodomain and extraterminal domain (BET) protein inhibitors (Lu et al. 2017). One of the first LRAs to be evaluated clinically was valproic acid, a weak HDAC inhibitor (Lehrman et al. 2005). Unfortunately, HIV+ individuals on chronic valproic acid for other conditions did not show significant reductions in the reservoir (Siliciano et al. 2007; Archin et al. 2008; Archin et al. 2010). Recent trials have utilized more potent HDAC inhibitors originally developed as cancer chemotherapeutic agents. While transient increases in cell associated and plasma HIV-1 RNA consistent with latency reversal have been seen in some clinical studies, no clear reservoir reduction has been reported (Archin et al. 2012; Cillo et al. 2014; Elliott et al. 2014; Rasmussen et al. 2014; Søgaard et al. 2015). These modest results have led to a renewed interest in T cell activating agents as part of a cure strategy since T cell activation clearly reverses latency at least in some infected cells.

One type of LRA that induce some degree of T cell activation is protein kinase C (PKC) agonist class. In a recent study, these were the only LRAs to have an effect across all cell line models of latency and ex-vivo in patient cells (Bullen et al. 2014). PKC agonists function as mimics of diacylglycerol and activate cellular PKC isoforms leading to downstream NFκB activation (for a review, see Jiang & Dandekar 2015). The only clinical trial using a PKC agonist for HIV-1 eradication involved the natural product PKC agonist bryostatin-1 (Gutiérrez et al. 2016). Although there was concern about the potential toxicity of PKC agonists, the study reported no adverse effects in HIV+ individuals. However, no reduction in the latent reservoir was observed. Notably, conservative drug dosing prevented the drug from reaching detectable systemic concentrations (Spivak and Planelles, 2018). If studies with PKC agonists move forward, several approaches may mitigate toxicities of higher PKC agonist dosing. These include administering drugs that target PKC isoforms that induce proviral gene expression but not proinflammatory cytokines, as well as drugs such as the JAK inhibitor ruxolitinib (Spivak et al. 2016) or mTOR inhibitors (Martin et al. 2017) that reduce cytokine production following T cell activation without compromising the induction of proviral gene expression. The precise effects of these immune-suppressants in HIV-1 latency reversal continue to be characterized (Besnard et al. 2016). An alternative way to reduce toxicity from PKC agonists is by using smaller doses that synergize with other LRA classes. Given the wide array of known factors involved in latency, combinations of LRAs that act on different pathways may be required to effectively induce viral gene expression in infected resting memory CD4+ T cells (Bullen et al. 2014). As an example, bryostatin-1 shows synergy in inducing HIV-1 gene expression when paired with the HDAC inhibitors romidepsin, panobinostat, and vorinostat or with the bromodomain inhibitor JQ1. Intriguingly, latency reversal by these combinations approaches that seen with T cell activation (Bullen et al. 2014; Laird et al. 2015; Darcis et al. 2015).

Another approach to latency reversal is based on a prior finding that some latently infected CD4+T cells are HIV-1-specific (Demoustier et al. 2002; Douek et al. 2002). If a large fraction of latently infected cells is HIV-1-specific, this population could potentially be reactivated with an HIV-1 vaccine preparation that provides a near-complete representation of viral quasispecies (Pankrac et al. 2017). Such a vaccine may also improve CTL priming and facilitate the “kill” portion of shock and kill strategies (Shan et al. 2012). This approach illustrates the principle that a latency reversing intervention may involve other cells (in this case, dendritic cells) and induce HIV-1 expression indirectly. Another example is the TLR-7 agonist GS-9620 which has been shown to induce HIV-1 expression in CD4+ T cells indirectly, possibly by inducing IFNγ release from plasmacytoid dendritic cells (Tsai et al. 2017).

Even if an optimal LRA regimen or a vaccine could reactivate most HIV-1 in aviremic individuals, it is also important to ensure that these reactivated cells would die. It was presumed that viral gene products would cause viral cytopathic effects (Roshal et al. 2003; Lenardo et al. 2002; Sakai et al. 2006; Shedlock et al. 2008), host immune targeting (Walker et al. 1987; Koup et al. 1994) or both. However, neither viral cytopathic effects nor CTL-mediated lysis may occur upon latency reversal without additional interventions (Shan et al. 2012). In one study, HIV-1-specific CTL had to be pre-stimulated with HIV-1 peptides in order to kill autologous patient cells in which latency was reversed (Shan et al., 2012). This finding may partly explain the failure of several LRA trials to reduce the reservoir. Newer studies are testing LRAs in conjunction with immune-enhancing vaccine strategies. Therapeutic vaccination of SIV-infected macaques with Ad26/MVA [recombinant adenovirus serotype 26 (Ad6) prime, modified vaccine Ankara (MVA) boost] and stimulation with a TLR7 agonist increased the breadth of SIV-specific immune responses, decreased viral DNA in lymph nodes and peripheral blood, and delayed rebound upon treatment interruption (Borducchi et al. 2016). In humans, therapeutic HIV immunization with Vacc-4×/GM-CSF followed by romidepsin treatment led to a mean reduction of 38% in HIV-1 DNA (Tapia et al. 2017; Leth et al. 2016).

The failure of LRA treatment to reduce the reservoir without additional interventions may also reflect the interference of certain LRAs (such as the HDAC inhibitors romidepsin, panobinostat, and SAHA, or combinations of LRAs) with CD8+ T cell effector function (Jones et al. 2014; Jones et al. 2016; Walker-Sperling et al. 2016; Kwaa et al. 2017), the prevalence of escape mutations in the latent reservoir (Deng et al., 2015), or CTL exhaustion (Day et al. 2006) – all described in subsequent sections. In addition, there may be intrinsic barriers to cell death in latently infected cells (Kim et al. 2018). One example is a relative decrease in the expression of pro-apoptotic proteins compared to the expression of anti-apoptotic protein expressions, raising the threshold for apoptosis (Berro et al. 2007; Neumann et al. 2015; Kim et al. 2018). Therefore, compounds that sensitize latently infected cells to apoptosis may tip the scale to cell death (Kim et al., 2018). Several of these have been proposed, including Bcl-2 antagonists (Cummins et al. 2016), PI3K/AKT inhibitors (Lucas et al. 2010), Smac mimetics (Fulda 2015), and the RIG-I inducer acitretin (Li et al. 2016; Garcia-Vidal et al. 2017).

To date, latency reversal has primarily been measured as an increase in cell-associated RNA following in vitro or ex vivo administration of LRAs (Archin et al. 2012; Søgaard et al. 2015; Elliott et al. 2014; Rasmussen et al. 2014; Archin et al. 2014). An assay that measures presentation of HIV-1 epitopes by MHC Class I (MHC-I) on CD4+ T cells following latency reversal would facilitate the evaluation of LRA strategies. The latency clearance assay (LCA), pioneered by Margolis and colleagues, begins to address this issue (Sung et al. 2015a; Sung et al. 2015b; Sloan et al. 2015; Sung et al. 2017). Briefly, the LCA assay involves co-culturing CD8+ T cells or ex-vivo expanded HIV-1 specific CD8+ T cells (HXTCs) with autologous resting CD4+ T cells that have been pre-treated with the HDAC inhibitor vorinostat to induce latency reversal. If latency reversal and CTL-mediated elimination are successful, fewer latently infected cells remain to produce viral outgrowth when plated at limiting dilution and maximally stimulated. This was indeed observed, and the effect was reversed with MHC-I blocking antibodies (Sung et al. 2017).

HIV-1 persistence due to clonal expansion

The remarkable stability of the latent reservoir has been attributed to longevity of the resting memory CD4+ T cells in which HIV-1 persists (Chun et al. 1997b; Brenchley et al. 2004). Resting memory CD4+ T cells normally undergo homeostatic and antigen-driven proliferation (Farber et al. 2014). However, the stimuli that lead to proliferation also lead to HIV-1 gene expression and consequently viral cytopathic effects, so it was unclear whether latently infected memory CD4+ T cells could proliferate as well. The earliest evidence of clonal expansion was provided by the discovery of predominant plasma clones in HIV+ individuals on suppressive cART (Tobin et al. 2005; Bailey et al. 2009). While cART reduces viremia to levels undetectable by standard clinical tests (limit of detection ~ 50 copies viral RNA/ml), residual viremia at about 1 copy/ml can be detected with special assays in most treated HIV+ individuals (Dornadula et al. 1999; Maldarelli et al. 2007). This very low level viremia likely reflects the stochastic daily activation of a small number of latently infected cells (Figure 1). Despite the enormous diversity of viral variants present in most infected individuals, analysis of plasma HIV-1 RNA sequences from treated HIV+ individuals revealed the presence of many identical sequences that persisted without evolution over months to years (Bailey et al. 2009). While technical limitations at the time prevented definitive demonstration that these plasma viruses were derived from a single productively infected cell clone (as opposed to multiple cells infected with the same virus), this work provided a conceptual framework for subsequent studies on clonal expansion.

Direct evidence for proliferation of latently infected cells came from an analysis of integration sites. HIV-1 integrates randomly into transcriptionally active regions of the human genome (Schröder et al. 2002; Han et al. 2004), and integration sites may therefore be used as barcodes to distinguish independent infection events. Several groups have reported finding exactly the same HIV-1 integration site in multiple CD4+ T cells from a given patient on cART (Wagner et al. 2014; Maldarelli et al. 2014; Cohn et al. 2015; Simonetti et al. 2016). Others have used full-length proviral sequencing (Cohn et al. 2015; Hosmane et al. 2017) and direct ex-vivo culture systems (Lorenzi et al. 2016; Hosmane et al. 2017; Bui et al. 2017) to provide evidence for clonal expansion of infected cells.

It is important to understand the stimuli driving this proliferative process. Integration of HIV-1 into pro-growth or cell cycle related genes has been observed and may contribute to the proliferation of some clones of infected cells (Maldarelli et al. 2014; Wagner et al. 2014). A pioneering analysis by Chomont et al. suggested that IL-7 and IL-15-driven homeostatic proliferation could increase numbers of infected CD4+ T cells in vivo (Chomont et al. 2009). Antigen-driven proliferation (Simonetti et al. 2016) has also been implicated. In the patient studied by Simonetti et al., a massively expanded T cell clone identified by integration site analysis (Maldarelli et al. 2014) was shown to carry a replication-competent virus. Intriguingly, plasma viremia produced by this clone paralleled the patient’s natural history of squamous cell carcinoma: viremia was first detected upon the patient’s initial cancer diagnosis, decreased upon chemotherapy and radiation treatment, increased during relapse, and was enriched in tumor tissue at autopsy. These findings raise the possibility that the expanded clone was proliferating in response to tumor antigen (Simonetti et al. 2016).

Co-infection with viruses such as CMV and EBV may also lead to antigen-driven proliferation of latently infected cells. In a recent study of 15 HIV-1 infected individuals who underwent chemotherapy for malignancy, reconstitution of the CD4+ T cell compartment led to an increase in HIV-1 DNA that was preferentially found in CMV- and EBV-specific CD4+ T cells (Henrich et al. 2017). However, it remains unclear to what extent the reservoir is composed of cells specific for these pathogens in the typical patient.

Importantly, most clonal expansion appears to occur in cells carrying defective proviruses (Cohn et al. 2015). This is expected, as defective proviruses may be less capable of giving rise to viral proteins that have cytopathic effects, while allowing immune targeting. However, recent studies have shown that clonal expansion of cells carrying replication-competent proviruses (Simonetti et al. 2016; Lorenzi et al. 2016; Bui et al. 2017; Hosmane et al. 2017). This troubling finding suggests that some proliferation indeed drives reservoir persistence. While some clones of latently infected cells persist, others wax and wane over a period of several years (Wang et al. 2018). These complex dynamics are not consistent with a cell autonomous proliferative process driven by effects related to integration site.

While proliferation of cells harboring defective proviruses with limited potential for HIV-1 gene expression may occur through normal homeostatic immune processes, clonal expansion of CD4+T cells harboring replication-competent proviruses is more difficult to explain. This type of clonal expansion suggests that cellular proliferation may somehow be decoupled from the activation pathways that turn on HIV-1 expression. Alternatively, proliferating clones carrying replication-competent proviruses may carry proviruses that are less susceptible to induction that other proviruses. Stated differently, a single round of T cell activation does not induce HIV-1 gene expression in all infected cells carrying intact proviruses (Ho et al. 2013; Hosmane et al. 2017), suggesting that unique factors related to the chromatin environment of individual proviruses or the transcriptional or metabolic state of the CD4+T cell subset that harbors latent HIV-1 may negatively influence viral inducibility and allow clonal expansion.

Altogether, these studies show that clonal expansion is a major mechanism for HIV-1 persistence. Three recent studies all show that expanded clones make up 50–60% of the latent reservoir at any given time (Hosmane et al. 2017; Bui et al. 2017; Lorenzi et al. 2016). Therefore, in addition to devising novel therapeutic strategies that reactivate and reduce the reservoir by >4 logs, we must also understand the factors responsible for clonal expansion. For example, if antigen-driven expansion in response to chronic viral pathogens (e.g. CMV, EBV) contributes to clonal expansion of the reservoir, therapeutic vaccination of individuals already infected with these common pathogens may hasten reservoir decay. Cytokine-driven proliferation will be more challenging to intercept therapeutically because it plays an important role in immune homeostasis (Farber et al. 2014). However, this pathway involves Jak-Stat signaling through STAT5, and the JAK inhibitors Tofacinib and Ruxolitinib are approved for long-term use in rheumatoid arthritis, polycythemia vera, and myelofibrosis. In vitro, these drugs block homeostatic proliferation of CD4+ T cells from aviremic HIV+ individuals without altering T cell effector function (Gavegnano et al. 2017), and it is possible that these would be used in future cure strategies to prevent reservoir expansion.

Apart from clonal expansion, a controversial mechanism for reservoir persistence involves ongoing cycles of HIV-1 replication despite cART, particularly in potential “sanctuary sites” such as the lymph node (LN) (Lorenzo-Redondo et al. 2016). Initially, ongoing replication in treated HIV+ individuals seemed to be a potential mechanism for residual viremia (Dornadula et al. 1999; Frenkel et al. 2003). In addition, many HIV+ individuals experience viral “blips,” in which viremia transiently rises above 50 copies/ml. Active viral replication would inevitably lead to sequence changes given the error-prone nature of the reverse transcriptase enzyme that copies the viral genome during each cycle. However, direct sequencing of plasma virus present during blips did not reveal new resistance mutations (Nettles et al. 2005). Numerous studies have clearly shown that the sequences of integrated HIV-1 proviruses and of plasma HIV-1 RNA in HIV+ individuals on cART do not evolve over time (Kieffer et al. 2004; Bailey et al. 2009; Sedaghat et al. 2007; Chomont et al. 2009; Josefsson et al. 2013; Kearney et al. 2014). Moreover, in a recent study of children who were treated early after perinatally infected, and therefore would have limited viral diversity and more easily discernable viral evolution, no sequence evolution was observed (van Zyl et al. 2017). The one recent study in which evidence for sequence evolution was presented (Lorenzo-Redondo et al. 2016) was conducted on lymph node rather than blood samples, unlike the other studies. However, it has been challenged on methodological grounds (Rosenbloom et al. 2017).

Further evidence against ongoing cycles of viral replication as a factor in HIV-1 persistence comes from treatment intensification studies (Figure 1). Intensification of an optimal 3-drug cART regimen by addition of a fourth antiretroviral drug from another class does not lower residual viremia (Dinoso et al. 2009; Gandhi et al. 2010; McMahon et al. 2010). Yet another argument against ongoing viral replication comes from the few “near cure” cases cited above. If cycles of replication were continuing during cART treatment of these HIV+ individuals, then viral rebound should have occurred within 2 weeks of treatment interruption, as soon as drug levels became sub-therapeutic, given the lack of antiviral immune responses in these HIV+ individuals.

Directing the immune response to effectively target the reservoir

Latency reversal on its own may not lead to reservoir reduction (Shan et al. 2012). The immune system must be induced to kill infected cells after latency reversal. CTLs are a major component of the host response to HIV-1 (Walker et al. 1987; Koup et al. 1994; Borrow et al. 1997; Schmitz et al. 1999; Gandhi & Walker 2002; Hersperger et al. 2011; Walker & McMichael 2012). Enhancing CTL responses to viruses harbored in the latent reservoir requires knowing which antigens will be presented when the cells are activated, an analysis made more complicated by the excess of defective HIV-1 proviruses in vivo. Moreover, any vaccine strategy must take into account potentially compromised cytolytic effector function, either from immune exhaustion, impaired memory maintenance, or LRA interference with effector function. In addition, the approach must also induce proper trafficking of cytolytic cells to potential “sanctuaries” in the lymph node, and improve the presentation/processing capacity of antigen presenting cells. These barriers to effective immune targeting of the reservoir are illustrated in Figure 3 and described below.

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Challenges for the “kill” phase of HIV-1 cure strategies. Although HIV-1 induces a strong CTL response, effective killing of latently infected cells following latency reversal requires overcoming several challenges. (A) Ideal scenario in which a resting CD4+ T cell with an integrated provirus (black rectangle) is induced by an LRA to produce viral RNA and protein, leading to presentation of HIV-1 epitopes (black dot) which can be recognized by HIV-1-specific CTL after they have been activated by HIV-1 antigen (Ag) or a vaccine presenting the relevant epitope. (B) Escape mutations in dominant CTL epitopes prevent targeting of induced cells. (C) Certain LRAs inhibit CTL function. (D) HIV-1-specific CTLs have an exhausted phenotype marked by expression of PC-1 (red). Exhaustion is not fully reversed by ART, and blockade of inhibitory receptors may be required to re-establish functionality. (E) Induction of cells carrying defective proviruses may lead to the generation of target cells that present epitopes, thereby interfering with the lysis of cells carrying intact proviruses. (F) Some infected cells may reside in tissue sites for which there is limited access by CTL. See text for details and references.

Improving CTL recognition of reactivated latently-infected cells

The first step in any antiviral memory response is recognition of target cells. For CD8+ T cells targeting HIV-1 persisting in the latent reservoir, the relevant antigens are peptides derived from replication-competent proviruses following latency reversal. Technical limitations currently prevent the physical identification of MHC-I epitopes on infected cells that have undergone latency reversal. Elution studies and mass spectrometry-based sequencing – classical methods to obtain proteome-wide views of MHC-I bound peptides – require 108–1010 cells (Ciudad et al. 2016). As a result, TCR and cell-based biosensors, which can detect as few as 1 peptide:MHC complex (Irvine et al. 2002), have been used to assay for specific peptide presentation upon latency reversal (Jones et al. 2016). Proof of concept studies demonstrated that the IL-15 superagonist ALT-803 can reverse latency in cells from HIV+ individuals, leading to peptide:MHC presentation detectable by an HLA-A2-restricted CD8+T cell clone specific for the SLYNTVATL (SL9) peptide from the HIV-1 Gag protein (Jones et al. 2016). This immunologic readout provides more direct information than HIV-1 mRNA induction and encourages further research on “kill” strategies.

Two complications hinder CTL recognition of presented HIV-1 epitopes. First, the latent reservoir in HIV+ individuals initiating treatment during the chronic stage of infection contains viruses with escape mutations in immunodominant CTL epitopes (Deng et al. 2015). Escape mutations are selected by potent immune pressure in the early stages of infection (Goonetilleke et al. 2009; Borrow et al. 1997; Price et al. 1997; Walker & McMichael 2012). From inoculation until cART initiation, proviral sequences are archived in the latent reservoir. Therefore, it is unsurprising that the reservoir contains proviruses with escape mutations to dominant epitopes. What is surprising is that mutant proviruses comprise the majority of the reservoir unless cART is started within the first months of infection (Deng et al. 2015). Immunodominance hierarchies may change, but it is clear that any CTL cell-based therapy targeting the reservoir must focus on subdominant epitopes for which escape mutations have not developed.

A second complication inherent in immune targeting of the latent reservoir is the excess of defective proviruses. Most defective proviruses appear to have functional LTRs (Ho et al. 2013), and some can be transcribed (Imamichi et al. 2016), giving rise to epitopes that can be recognized by HIV-1-specific CTL clones (Pollack et al., 2017). Cells carrying defective proviruses vastly outnumber cells with replication-competent proviruses, so CTL responses may be diverted by these “decoys” (Pollack et al. 2017).

In a recent study illustrating this potential problem, autologous CTL clones were used to eliminate infected patient CD4+ T cells that had undergone latency reversal with an IL-15 superagonist. While reductions in total HIV-1 DNA were observed, there were no reductions in the inducible, intact proviruses as measured by the viral outgrowth assay (Huang et al. 2018). The authors concluded that defective proviruses may be preferentially targeted by CTLs, perhaps due to mutations or deletions in the HIV-1 nef gene (Bruner et al. 2016), whose protein product downregulates MHC-I (Huang et al. 2018). If so, pharmacologic blockade of Nef may improve CTL killing of cells harboring intact proviruses and therefore reduce the reservoir (Mujib et al. 2017a).

Several strategies may enhance CTL-mediated cure interventions. First, it is critical to target regions of the HIV-1 genome that are relatively conserved across different isolates (Wilson et al. 2017). Second, because HIV-1 Nef does not downregulate HLA-C or HLA-E molecules (Cohen et al. 1999), identifying conserved epitopes that may be presented on these molecules may lead to more effective CTL targeting strategies. Of course, peptide-based vaccines have limitations (i.e. restricted to particular MHC I alleles, susceptible to exo- and endopeptidases). Therefore, longer peptides that contain multiple epitopes and are less subject to degradation may more successfully activate appropriate T cells (Slingluff 2011)

A second approach that may address HIV-1 sequence diversity and immune escape involves inducing broad immune responses that bypass conventional epitopes. Picker and colleagues have employed such a strategy in a series of elegant experiments using SIV. A Rhesus cytomegalovirus (RhCMV) vector was used to deliver SIV antigens to rhesus macaques that were then challenged with SIV. Vaccination led to immune control of SIV viremia in 50% of monkeys and ultimately complete clearance of the virus after an average of 3.4 years (Hansen et al. 2009; Hansen et al. 2011; Hansen et al. 2013a). These remarkable results are likely due to the breadth, promiscuity and non-classical restriction pattern of induced αβ CD8+ T cells. Specifically, the CD8+ T cells recognized 3 times as many epitopes as CD8+ T cells induced by conventional adenoviral vectors, and notably, the responses were Class II and HLA-E restricted (Hansen et al. 2013b; Hansen et al. 2016). The mechanism underlying this broad, unconventional T cell priming has not been elucidated, but appears to depend on the replication-competency and tropism of the 68.1 CMV strain used in the vaccine vector (Hansen et al. 2013b; Hansen et al. 2016).

While more successful than any other preventative HIV-1 or SIVvaccine tested to date, the RhCMV vaccine has not yet been shown to result in cure or control of viremia following treatment interruption in macaques that were already infected with SIV and would likely need to be combined with LRAs and cART in curative strategies. It is also unclear whether a human CMV version of this vaccine vector could be attenuated in a manner that would not pose a risk for pregnant women or immunocompromised individuals. Regardless, understanding the mechanism of this remarkable vaccine strategy may yield important insights into targeting the reservoir. As HLA-E has only two main alleles in the human population, a vaccine that induces HLA-E-restricted responses should target a large fraction of infected individuals (Hansen et al. 2016). Class II-restricted CD8+ T cells were reported recently in a small percent of HIV-1 elite controllers, and HLA-E restricted CD8+ T cell responses are naturally seen in the human immune response to Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Joosten et al. 2016). Therefore, it is possible that a strategy to induce non-canonical responses in humans will be successful once we better understand how such responses are naturally primed.

Antibody targeting of the induced reservoir

Biomarkers of the reservoir

A host cell-surface protein that could easily demark latently infected cells even without latency reversal could facilitate target cell killing, but has proven challenging to find. Some studies have suggested that CD4+ T cells expressing particular host cell surface proteins contain a large fraction of the HIV-1 reservoir. In the lymph node, PD-1+ follicular (CXCR5+) and non-follicular CD4+T cells were shown to contain inducible replication-competent virus (Perreau et al. 2013; Banga et al. 2016). However, these cells may be in an activated state and not therefore representative of the stable latent reservoir. Moreover, the frequency of these cells decreases over time (Banga et al. 2016). A separate study in SIV-infected macaques showed that CTLA-4+PD-1 memory CD4+T cells in the blood, lymph node, spleen, and gut, which share phenotypic markers with T-regulatory cells, are enriched for replication-competent SIV (McGary et al. 2017). Another recent report suggested that CD32a, an Fcγ receptor not normally expressed on CD4+T cells, could serve as a biomarker for the latent reservoir: CD32a+CD4+ T cells were found to be significantly enriched for HIV-1 DNA and inducible replication-competent virus (Descours et al., 2017). However, these findings have not been reproduced by other labs (Bertagnolli et al., 2018) and the search for a latent-reservoir biomarker is ongoing.

bNAb targeting of the reservoir

Another strategy for targeting the reservoir is through the use of antibodies against determinants expressed on infected cells following latency-reversal. These antibodies may promote lysis of latently infected cells through conjugation to toxins (Kreitman 2006), antibody-dependent cell mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) (Horwitz et al. 2017), or possibly antibody-dependent complement-mediated lysis (ADCML). Antibody therapy may overcome HLA limitations of peptide-based CTL approaches.

The HIV-1 envelope protein (Env) is synthesized and trafficked to the plasma membrane of productively infected cells. Antibodies to HIV-1 Env can neutralize HIV-1 and improve humoral immune responses to the virus (Schoofs et al. 2016). They may also provide another way to target infected cells following latency reversal. Most HIV+ individuals do not make neutralizing antibodies to HIV-1 Env until months after initial infection (Maartens et al. 2014). Only a minority of infected individuals make broadly neutralizing antibodies (bNAbs) against multiple HIV-1 strains (Sather et al. 2009; Mikell et al. 2011). HIV-1 Env can tolerate extensive mutation with limited viral fitness costs, and steric hindrance from a glycan sheath can block vulnerable antibody binding sites (Burton and Hangartner 2016). However, advances in B cell cloning have allowed the HIV-1 vaccine field to produce bNAbs against vulnerable regions of HIV-1 Env for passive immunization, as described elsewhere in this issue by John Mascola and Peter Kwong. These antibodies have also recently been used as research tools to interrogate the latent reservoir. One group recently used Env-specific bNAbs in a magnetic enrichment and fluorescence-assisted cell sorting technique (Latency Capture, or LURE) to isolate latently infected cells that were induced to express Env upon T cell activation (Cohn 2018). Such cells were then subjected to single-cell RNA-seq analyses to understand transcriptional signatures that may explain the persistence of infected cells.

Recently, bNAbs have been tested in studies targeting the latent reservoir (Halper-Stromberg et al. 2014). Infusion of bNAbs directed against the CD4+ binding site on the HIV-1 Env protein led to decreases in viremia in cART-untreated HIV+ individuals (Lynch et al. 2015; Caskey et al. 2016) and a delay in viral rebound of 4–9 weeks after an analytical cART interruption in treated HIV+ individuals. (Bar et al. 2016; Scheid et al. 2016; Lu et al. 2016). Notably, the therapeutic efficacy of one of these antibodies, 3BNC117, was Fc-receptor dependent (Bournazos et al., 2014; Lu et al., 2016). Infusion of this antibody enhanced clearance of infected cells and accelerated the emergence of new bNAbs in humans (Scheid et al. 2016; Lu et al. 2016; Schoofs et al. 2016). Additionally, administering B3NC117 with the CD4-binding site antibody b12 and the V3-specific monoclonal antibody PGT121 suppressed rebound in macaques chronically infected with pathogenic SHIV, an SIV that carries the HIV-1 rather than SIV env gene (Barouch et al. 2013). None of these trials administered bNAbs after latency reversal. Presumably, greater reservoir reductions would occur in that scenario. An alternative interpretation of the delayed rebound seen in these studies is that the systemic clearance of antibodies is slower than expected from plasma measurements, and that it is their continued neutralization potential rather than elimination of the latent reservoir that delays rebound.

Although bNAbs hold promise for HIV-1 cure, their use has several caveats. Just as resistance mutations may develop to chemotherapeutic or antiretroviral monotherapy, resistance can develop to single bNAb infusions by selecting for the outgrowth of bNAb-resistant viruses (Caskey et al. 2016). Therefore, a cocktail of bNAbs may be required (Mujib et al. 2017b). Impressively engineered bispecific or trispecific bNAbs, capable of targeting multiple vulnerable sites in Env, may provide an alternative solution (Asokan et al. 2015; Xu et al. 2017). Another caveat is that passive immunization is currently the only method of delivering bNAbs to HIV+ individuals, and the half-lives of bNAbs, which range from 12–20 days in HIV+ individuals, will require sequential infusions for improved reservoir reduction (Caskey et al. 2016; Scheid et al. 2016). However, engineered variants of bNAbs with substantially longer half-lives are currently being tested (Gaudinski et al., 2018).

Strategies to induce bNAbs in vivo are ongoing, for instance through delivery via adenovirus serotype 5 (Ad5) or adeno-associated virus serotype 1 (AAV-1) vectors (Badamchi-Zadeh et al. 2018). Furthermore, Env-reactive non-neutralizing antibodies may still eliminate target cells through ADCC (Horwitz et al. 2017). This effect may have contributed to the protection seen in the RV144 trial, the only successful human HIV-1 vaccine trial to date (Rerks-Ngarm et al. 2009). Finally, other iterations of antibody-based therapy involve combining bNAb specificity with CTL or NKT activity, through the use of dual-affinity retargeting (DART) antibodies. These engineered constructs contain a broadly neutralizing antibody to HIV-1 Env linked to a monoclonal antibody to CD3. DARTS can mediate in vitro lysis of infected cells that are cultured with autologous CD8+ T cells (Sloan et al. 2015; Petrovas et al. 2017). Ex-vivo studies have also shown that DARTs can reduce viral outgrowth from the latent reservoir (Sung et al. 2015b; Sung et al. 2017).

α4β7 immunotherapy

Other antibody-based strategies are also promising. While not a marker of the reservoir per se, the integrin α4β7 expressed on CD4+T cells has become an interesting antigenic target from a different standpoint. This integrin directs CD4+ T homing to MAdCAM-expressing mucosal and gut-associated lymphoid tissue (GALT) (Byrareddy et al. 2016). SIV preferentially infects CD4+ T cells with α4β7 (Kader et al. 2009), and administration of primatized antibodies against α4β7 integrin (ACT-1) protects macaques against vaginal challenge with SIV (Byrareddy et al. 2014). In addition, one recent study found that administration of cART with ACT-1 after 5 weeks of SIV infection led to virologic control for up to 9 months after cART interuption in several macaques (Byrareddy et al. 2016). While these results are intriguing, the macaques may have had small reservoirs due to early treatment (5 weeks), and there is naturally a higher rate of spontaneous control of SIV compared to HIV-1 (Asquith et al. 2009; Shedlock et al. 2009; Bruel et al. 2015). Recently, α4β7 was shown to be incorporated in virions, providing another potential mechanism for control: anti-α4β7 antibodies may both help prevent viral entry and block new infections, contributing to decreased spreading of viral infection in the gut (Guzzo et al. 2017). An antibody to α4β7 (vedolizumab) is already approved for use in Crohn’s disease, and provided that it does not induce anti-drug antibodies (as seen with 3 out of 11 tested macaques) (Byrareddy et al. 2016), it may be an important addition to the HIV-1 cure regimen in humans. The efficacy of vedolizumab with ART is being tested in a phase I clinical trial (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02788175).

Reversing effector T cell exhaustion

Thus far, this discussion has focused on immune recognition of infected cells. It is also important to consider factors that compromise effector cell function and migration to target cells and to design therapies to address these issues. As discussed above, HIV-1-specific CD8+ T cells from HIV+ individuals on long term cART must be pre-stimulated to kill infected cells (Shan et al. 2012). This may be due in part to the absence of antigen in HIV+ individuals on long-term cART. In addition, the frequency of Gag-specific CD4+ T cells decreases with prolonged cART (Pitcher et al. 1999). As antigen-specific CD4+ T cells are needed for optimal CD8+ T recall responses, decreased frequencies of HIV-1-specific CD4+ T cells may limit CD8+ T cell recall responses. Furthermore, chronic HIV-1 infection leads to defects in CTL function that are not fully reversed with cART (Kalams et al. 1999). CD4+ and CD8+ T cell exhaustion is a major factor, first defined in pioneering studies using the murine LCMV model (Zajac et al. 1998).

T cell exhaustion arises from persistent antigen exposure and immune activation. It can occur during chronic viral infections such as HIV-1 or in the setting of malignancy (Day et al. 2006; Bucks et al. 2009; Streeck et al. 2008; Cockerham et al. 2014). Space and scope limitations prevent us from detailing underlying mechanisms of exhaustion, but they have been expertly described at length (Wherry & Kurachi 2015; Hashimoto et al. 2018). Exhaustion occurs for both CD8+ and CD4+T cells. Antigen-specific effector and memory cell exhaustion involves a step-wise loss in effector function and proliferative capacity that can progress in severity until such cells are deleted (Kahan et al. 2015). Exhausted CD8+T cells have transcriptional and epigenetic profiles distinct from terminally differentiated or memory CD8+ T cells, secrete fewer cytokines, and are marked by cell-surface expression of inhibitory receptors such as PD-1, CTLA4, Tim3, TIGIT, CD160, and LAG-3 (Trautmann et al. 2006; Petrovas et al. 2006; Wherry et al., 2007; Jones et al. 2008; Blackburn et al. 2009; Kahan et al. 2015). Surface expression of inhibitory receptors increases upon activation and limits excess T cell activation, providing so-called immune checkpoints (IC) (Wherry & Kurachi 2015). Although these inhibitory receptors are typically downregulated at the conclusion of an immune response, chronic antigen exposure leads to their persistent expression on the cell surface. Blocking inhibitory receptors (checkpoint blockade) rejuvenates certain exhausted anti-viral T cells (Barber et al. 2006; Day et al. 2006; Blackburn et al. 2008; Blackburn et al. 2009) as well as CD8+ T cells specific for tumor antigens (Iwai et al. 2005; Kamphorst et al., 2017). Notably, not all CD8+ T cells respond to checkpoint blockade equally, and combinations of therapies seem to provide the best recovery of CD8+ T cell function (Blackburn et al. 2008; Im et al. 2016). In the wake of these studies, several checkpoint therapies have been approved for use in combination cancer immunotherapy and have revolutionized the oncology field. Such combination therapies may prove beneficial for the “kill” phase of shock and kill strategies.

If persistent antigen leads to exhaustion, reduced antigen exposure should improve exhaustion phenotypes. HIV-1-specific CD8+ T cells recovered from the acute phase of infection in untreated individuals exhibited an exhausted state that is reduced upon cART treatment or epitope escape (Streeck et al. 2008). However, even in the setting of minimal to absent persistent antigen, such as in individuals on suppressive cART, effector functions may not be completely restored. In the lymph node, for example, non-follicular and follicular CD8+ T cells express high levels of PD-1 and TIGIT, and blocking the PD-1/PDL-1 axis in vitro restores HIV-1-specific CD8+ T cell function in these cells (Petrovas et al. 2017). Intriguingly, certain IC markers are also present on specific memory CD4+T cells and are associated with higher HIV-1 DNA content, suggesting that these ICs somehow promote latency in these subsets (Chomont et al., 2009; Fromentin et al., 2016). As such, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies may be useful in HIV-1 cure strategies, as they improve CTL function (primarily on CXCR5+ expressing CD8+T cells present in the lymph node) and target a portion of the latent reservoir. A Phase I randomized clinical trial of anti-PD-L1 antibodies showed a trend towards enhanced Gag-specific CD8+T cell responses (Gay et al. 2017).

Diminished CTL functionality and migration into lymph nodes

Antigen recognition and dysfunctional effector cells are not the only impediments to killing of infected cells. Location is another challenge, as effector and target cells must be in close proximity. Most target cells are located in the lymphoid tissues such as the lymph nodes. The gut-associated lymphoid tissue (GALT) contains a substantial proportion of the body’s lymphocytes, and CD4+ T cells in the GALT are the first to be targeted during acute infection (Veazey 1998). In HIV+ individuals on cART, there is a high frequency of proviral DNA in CD4+ T cells in the GALT: 5000 copies/1 million cells, nearly five times higher than that in blood (Chun et al. 2008). This may reflect the increase susceptibility of these cells to infection due to high frequency of CCR5 expression and the overall higher activation state of these CD4+ T cells. Although it remains controversial whether the GALT is a major HIV-1 reservoir (Lerner et al. 2011; Rothenberger et al. 2015), interventions that can appropriately target infected cells in the GALT may be needed.

Within the lymph nodes, CTLA4+CD4+T cells appear to serve as a target cell type for infection in the T cell zone of the lymph node (McGary et al., 2017), while the CD4+ T follicular helper (TfH) cell subset within the B cell follicle of the lymph node forms a major CD4+ compartment for HIV-1 production (Lindqvist et al. 2012; Fukazawa et al. 2012; Petrovas et al. 2012; Perreau et al. 2013; Boritz et al., 2016). CTLs do not normally express receptors that allow homing to the B cell follicle until late in untreated infection (Connick et al. 2007). Therefore, B cell follicles are considered sanctuary sites for HIV-1 replication as they are shielded from CTL and/or NK cell-mediated cytolysis (Fukazawa et al. 2015; Huot et al. 2017). Indeed, CTL exclusion from the follicle appears to be the mechanism for viral replication within TfH cells in elite controller macaques. Depletion of anti-viral CD8+ T cells leads to SIV replication in non-follicular CD4+ T cells (Fukazawa et al. 2015). Full reservoir clearance may require inducing HIV-1 expression in TfH cells and then targeting this compartment with CTLs. Proposed approaches to addressing this dilemma include temporarily disrupting the B cell follicle with B cell depleting antibodies (anti-CD20) or by blocking B/T cell interactions (anti-CD40L blockade) (Fukazawa et al. 2015). Additionally, as CCR7lowCXCR5hi CD8+T cells can home to B cell follicles during late stage infection and AIDS, therapeutic vaccine approaches that induce this effector cell phenotype should be pursued (Fukazawa et al. 2015).

Another consideration is that CTL within lymph nodes appear to differ in some respects from CTL in blood. Fewer terminally differentiated effector CD8+T cells are present in the lymph nodes of HIV+ individuals than in their blood (Reuter et al. 2017). Moreover, lymph node CTLs have a limited ability to kill targets and express lower levels of perforin, an essential mediator of cytolysis (Petrovas et al. 2017; Reuter et al. 2017). Similar findings have been obtained from studies on the human gastrointestinal mucosa of HIV+ individuals (Kiniry et al. 2017). Differences in transcriptional programming of CTLs in the LN versus blood may account for these differences (Reuter et al. 2017). Notably, certain LRAs (such as the TLR7 agonist GS-9620) can actually increase cytolytic activity of CD8+ T cells (Tsai et al. 2017), and could be used for this purpose.

NK cell escape and immunotherapy approaches

The HIV-1 cure field has focused on inducing T-cell based cytolytic therapies, given that these cells exert potent selection pressure on the virus and the fact that viral control in rare individuals is linked to CTL responses (Walker et al. 1987; Gandhi & Walker 2002; Hersperger et al. 2011; Migueles & Connors 2015). However, natural killer (NK) cells may also play an important role in cure strategies. NK cells, the effectors likely responsible for antibody-mediated clearance mentioned earlier, have also been implicated in HIV-1 and SIV control (Alter et al. 2011; Ramsuran et al. 2018). Intriguingly, NK cells localize within and around lymph nodes in African green monkeys, a natural SIV host in which infection does not progress to AIDS (Huot et al. 2017). Two major types of NK cells exist in humans, distinguished by their anatomical location. In blood, 90% of NK cells are CD56dim, express perforin (Fehniger et al. 2003; Ferlazzo et al. 2004), and can be recruited to the lymph node in a CCR7-and CXCR3-dependent manner by certain adjuvants or by mature dendritic cell injection in murine models (Martín-Fontecha et al. 2004). A separate NK cell population predominates in human lymph nodes and is CD56bright. These cells do not express perforin constitutively, but can upregulate cytolytic function following exposure to low-levels of IL-2 secreted by T cells (Fehniger et al. 2003; Ferlazzo et al. 2004).

While viral escape from CTL-mediated immune pressure has been established (Borrow et al. 1994; Price et al. 1997), more recent studies demonstrate that NK cell-mediated pressure can also lead to viral sequence changes (Alter et al. 2011). The activation status of NK cells depends on the balance between activating and inhibitory receptors (Cassidy et al. 2014). The killer cell immunoglobulin-like receptors (KIR) are inhibitory NK cell receptors that recognize specific HLA-A, -B, and -C alleles, along with associated peptides (Thananchai et al. 2007). Mutations in the HIV-1 sequence can influence the nature of peptides that bind to these MHC molecules, potentially leading to modified binding of inhibitory receptors and altered NK cell activity. Indeed, in untreated HIV+ individuals homozygous for the inhibitory receptor KIR2DL, Alter et al. identified several relevant mutations in Env and the viral protein u (Vpu). CD4+T cells infected with an HIV-1 strain carrying these mutations were killed less efficiently by KIR2DL+ expressing NK cells (Alter et al. 2011). It is unclear to what extent the latent reservoir has archived KIR-associated polymorphisms in proviruses that mediate NK-cell escape. Databases for full-length proviral sequences could be mined to determine whether resistance to NK-mediated killing is a characteristic of the reservoir (Ramsuran et al. 2018).

In a subset of HIV+ individuals treated with the HDAC inhibitor panobinostat, levels of HIV-1 DNA decreased by 70–80% and were associated with a slightly longer time to viral rebound during analytical treatment interruption (Olesen et al. 2015). Interestingly, HIV+ individuals with this favorable outcome had higher frequencies of cytotoxic CD56dim NK cells (Olesen et al. 2015), and the authors speculate that this may have resulted from LRA-induced alteration in expression of NK receptor ligands on infected CD4+T cells. In another study, PEG-IFNα induced NK cell activation in Hepatitis C/HIV-1 coinfected individuals on long-term suppressive cART; there was a significant correlation between CD56bright NK cell levels and decreases in cell-associated proviral DNA (Hua et al. 2017). These results indicate that both types of NK cells may play a role in cytolysis of infected cell targets upon HIV-1 induction. Thus, agents that activate NK cells – by increasing activating receptor expression and/or decreasing inhibitory receptor expression – may improve clearance of latently infected cells following latency reversal.

Recently, “memory-like” NK cells have been identified in the murine, macaque, and human immune systems. These cells are often identified by higher expression of the NKG2C activating receptors (Lopez-Vergès et al. 2011; Reeves et al. 2015). The fact that memory-like NK cells were observed in macaques five years after Ad26 vaccination suggests that persistent antigen may not be required for their survival and that these cells may be induced through specific vaccination (Reeves et al. 2015). While intriguing, NK cell memory is a new area with many unknowns. Which subsets of cells serve as “memory” responders and which ligands induce NK cell memory are unclear (Peng & Tian 2017). Whether such memory cells can immediately exert effector function after HIV-1 reactivation is also uncertain (Peng & Tian 2017). Finally, as we still do not know the extent of NK escape mutations in the reservoir, it is possible that such mutations may increase the threshold for NK cell activation by strengthening inhibitory receptor binding. Despite these caveats, understanding the basic mechanisms underlying NK cell memory to SIV and HIV-1 is important for improving vaccine-induced cytolytic therapies.

Other clinically relevant reservoirs in the quest for a cure

In this review, we have focused on resting memory CD4+ T cells as the primary and best understood reservoir of HIV-1. This reservoir contains integrated, replication-competent HIV-1 that can be reactivated with T cell stimulation, is readily demonstrable in all infected individuals, and persists indefinitely even in infected individuals on cART. No other proposed reservoir has yet to been shown to fulfill all of these criteria. Monocytes and macrophages express low levels of CD4 and CCR5 and are susceptible to infection by R5-tropic HIV-1 (Gartner et al. 1986; Igarashi et al. 2003). Macrophages are thought to be especially important in HIV-1 disease pathogenesis and HIV-1-associated dementia (HAD) as CD4+ T cell targets become depleted. However, their role in HIV-1 persistence in treated HIV+ individuals remains controversial.

Monocytes are continuously produced in the bone marrow, circulate briefly (half-life in the circulation = 1 day), and then enter tissues and differentiate into macrophages in a tissue-specific fashion, for example into microglia in the brain. Thus monocytes cannot serve as a long-lived reservoir. Tissue-resident macrophages derived from monocytes have a relatively short half-life on the order of weeks, depending on the tissue (Ginhoux & Guilliams 2016), while those derived from embryonic hematopoetic precursors have a longer half-life of 24–36 months (Kandathil et al. 2016). Integrated proviral DNA has been observed in brain astrocytes and microglia (Churchill et al. 2006), which have half-lives on the order of months and years, respectively (Marban et al. 2016). However, astrocytes are unable to be infected in vitro and observed integrated DNA may have been due to engulfment of HIV-1 infected cells (Russell et al., 2017). Therefore, of the known long-lived non-T cell subtypes, embryonically-derived macrophages or microglia could serve as long-term HIV-1 reservoirs.

One interesting proposed mechanism of SIV latency in the brain is through infection-induced IFNβ mRNA production by macrophages. IFNβ mRNA suppresses LTR activity directly and by inducing a dominant-negative CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein-β (C/EBP-β) that suppresses histone acetylation at the SIV LTR (Barber et al. 2006). Low susceptibility of macrophages to CD8+ T cell killing due to decreased granzyme B sensitivity is another proposed mechanism for HIV-1 and SIV persistence (Vojnov et al. 2012; Rainho et al. 2015; Clayton et al. 2017). Interestingly, retroviral infection of these non-dividing cell types is unexpected. Degradation of dNTPs by host restriction factor SAMHD1 within macrophages slows the reverse transcription process and therefore limits productive infection of macrophages by HIV-1 (Laguette et al. 2011). SIV has developed a mechanism to address this limitation through its gene product Vpx, which facilitates the ubiquitination and degradation of SAMHD1. However, HIV-1 lacks Vpx and the extent of macrophage infection by HIV-1 in vivo is still not clear.

While the latent reservoir in resting CD4+ T cells can be readily studied using peripheral blood samples, analysis of the role of macrophages and other potential reservoirs for HIV-1 persistence requires tissue samples. Few studies have been conducted on tissue macrophages from HIV+ individuals or SIV-infected macaques on suppressive cART for at least six months (Thompson et al. 2011; Churchill et al. 2006). The length of treatment is important because HIV-1 DNA or RNA observed in macrophages from untreated HIV+ individuals or those on short-term treatment may not represent stable long-term infection. Notably, residual free virus has been observed in the cerebrospinal fluid of HIV+ individuals on long-term suppressive cART (Dahl et al. 2014), but it is unclear whether this arises from memory CD4+ T cells passing through the recently discovered brain lymphatic system (Louveau et al. 2015) or resident long-lived immune cells harboring latent HIV-1 that have become activated. Past reports have also shown that macrophages from the lung (alveolar macrophages) (Cribbs et al. 2015), duodenum (Zalar et al. 2010), and GALT (Josefsson et al. 2013) contain HIV-1 proviral DNA in infected individuals on cART. However, the presence of proviral DNA does not prove direct infection unless phagocytosis of debris from dying CD4+ T cells by macrophages is ruled out (Calantone et al. 2014). In some cases engulfment can lead to productive macrophage infection in vitro (Baxter et al. 2014). Observing both TCR and integrated proviral sequences from isolated macrophage DNA would help address this question.

SIV macaque models as well as several mouse models can provide a way around the limited access to human tissues (DiNapoli et al. 2016; Honeycutt et al. 2017). For example, reservoir dynamics have been recently studied in an elegant myeloid-only mouse (MoM) model. Human CD34+ progenitor cells were engrafted into NOD/SCID mice that cannot support T cell development, thereby allowing for only B cells and myeloid lineage cells to develop. Mice were infected HIV-1, treated with cART, and then subjected to treatment interruption. Notably, infected macrophages had a half-life of < 1 day based on the decay of viremia, and only 33% of mice experienced viral rebound (Honeycutt et al. 2017). Thus in this model system, infected macrophages decayed so rapidly in vivo that prolonged cART may be sufficient to dramatically reduce this population. Had cART been extended, it is possible that none of the animals would have experienced viral rebound. Still, the fact that some rebound did occur underscores the heterogeneity of macrophages and the fact that some long-lived immune cells, possibly in the brain, may serve as a reservoir. It is important to address this question, in particular from a non-human primate model or from human autopsy studies. Novel assays to detect HIV-1 viral outgrowth from macrophages isolated from treated HIV+ individuals or SIV-infected macaques will be critical in addressing this question (Avalos et al. 2016; Clayton et al. 2017).

Conclusion

HIV-1 continues to be a global pandemic even with the availability of modern cART, and the infection remains incurable due to a long-lived reservoir of quiescent CD4+ T cells that harbor infectious proviruses. For the past twenty years, the field has made remarkable strides in defining key genetic, molecular, and cellular features of the latent reservoir. This work has led to strategies to “shock” HIV-1 out of latency and “kill” infected cells. As outlined, however, many hurdles remain to developing a cure strategy that takes into account the complex mechanisms of HIV-1 persistence. Novel techniques to interrogate the reservoir and direct killing of the relevant target cells will be critical moving forward. Based on several exciting near-cure cases and a single cure case, there is considerable optimism about the prospect of a global cure, and it is likely that several of the pharmacologic and immunologic interventions discussed here will pave the way for this.

Acknowledgments

We thank Janet Siliciano, Kevin Shenderov, and Andrew Timmons for advice on the manuscript. This work was supported by the NIH Martin Delaney I4C (UM1 AI126603), Beat-HIV (UM1 AI126620) and DARE (UM1 AI12661) Collaboratories, by the Johns Hopkins Center for AIDS Research (P30AI094189), and by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1115715).

References

  1. Alter G et al. , 2011. HIV-1 adaptation to NK-cell-mediated immune pressure. Nature, 476(7358), pp.96–101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Archin NM et al. , 2012. Administration of vorinostat disrupts HIV-1 latency in patients on antiretroviral therapy. Nature, 489(7416), p.460. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Archin NM et al. , 2010. Antiretroviral intensification and valproic acid lack sustained effect on residual HIV-1 viremia or resting CD4+ cell infection. PLoS ONE, 5(2): e9390. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Archin NM et al. , 2014. Eradicating HIV-1 infection: Seeking to clear a persistent pathogen. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 12(11), pp.750–764. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Archin NM et al. , 2008. Valproic acid without intensified antiviral therapy has limited impact on persistent HIV infection of resting CD4+ T cells. AIDS, 22(10), pp.1131–1135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Asokan M et al. , 2015. Bispecific Antibodies Targeting Different Epitopes on the HIV-1 Envelope Exhibit Broad and Potent Neutralization. Journal of Virology, 89(24), pp.12501–12512. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Asquith B et al. , 2009. Lymphocyte kinetics in health and disease. Trends in Immunology, 30(4), pp.182–189. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Avalos CR et al. , 2016. Quantitation of Productively Infected Monocytes and Macrophages of Simian Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Macaques. Journal of Virology, 90(12), pp.5643–5656. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Badamchi-Zadeh A et al. , 2018. Therapeutic efficacy of vectored PGT121 gene delivery in HIV-1-infected humanized mice. Journal of Virology, p.JVI.01925–17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bailey JR et al. , 2009. Analysis of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 viremia and provirus in resting CD4+ T cells reveals a novel source of residual viremia in patients on antiretroviral therapy. Journal of virology, 83(17), pp.8470–81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Baldauf H-M et al. , 2012. SAMHD1 restricts HIV-1 infection in resting CD4+ T cells. Nature Medicine, 18(11), pp.1682–1688. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Banga R et al. , 2016. PD-1+and follicular helper T cells are responsible for persistent HIV-1 transcription in treated aviremic individuals. Nature Medicine, 22(7), pp.754–761. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Bar KJ et al. , 2016. Effect of HIV Antibody VRC01 on Viral Rebound after Treatment Interruption. New England Journal of Medicine, 375(21), pp.2037–2050. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Barber DL et al. , 2006. Restoring function in exhausted CD8 T cells during chronic viral infection. Nature, 439(7077), pp.682–687. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Barber SA et al. , 2006. Mechanism for the establishment of transcriptional HIV latency in the brain in a simian immunodeficiency virus-macaque model. The Journal of infectious diseases, 193(7), pp.963–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Barouch DH et al. , 2013. Therapeutic efficacy of potent neutralizing HIV-1-specific monoclonal antibodies in SHIV-infected rhesus monkeys. Nature, 503(7475), pp.224–228. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Barré-Sinoussi et al. , 1983. Isolation of a T-lymphotropic retrovirus from a patient at risk for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Science, 220(4599), pp.868–71. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Baxter AE et al. , 2014. Macrophage infection via selective capture of HIV-1-infected CD4+ T cells. Cell Host and Microbe, 16(6), pp.711–721. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Berro R et al. , 2007. Identifying the membrane proteome of HIV-1 latently infected cells. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 282(11), pp.8207–8218. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Bertagnolli et al. , 2018. Substantial Fraction of HIV reservoir is CD32 negative. Nature, in press. [Google Scholar]
  21. Besnard E et al. , 2016. The mTOR Complex Controls HIV Latency. Cell Host and Microbe, 20(6), pp.785–797. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Budhiraja et al. , 2013. Cyclin T1 and CDK9 T-loop Phosphorylation Are Downregulated during the Establishment of HIV-1 Latency in Primary Resting Memory CD4+ T cells. Journal of Virology, 87(2), pp.1211–1220. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Bieniasz PD et al. , 1999. Recruitment of cyclin T1/P-TEFb to an HIV type 1 long terminal repeat promoter proximal RNA target is both necessary and sufficient for full activation of transcription. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 96, pp.7791–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Blackburn SD et al. , 2009. Coregulation of CD8+ T cell exhaustion by multiple inhibitory receptors during chronic viral infection. Nature Immunology, 10, pp.29–37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Blackburn SD et al. , 2008. Selective expansion of a subset of exhausted CD8 T cells by PD-L1 blockade. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(39), pp.15016–15021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Blankson JN et al. , 2000. Biphasic Decay of Latently Infected CD4 + T Cells in Acute Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 182(6), pp.1636–1642. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Blankson JN et al. , 2007. Isolation and characterization of replication-competent human immunodeficiency virus type 1 from a subset of elite suppressors. Journal of virology, 81(5), pp.2508–18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Bleul CC et al. , 1997. The HIV coreceptors CXCR4 and CCR5 are differentially expressed and regulated on human T lymphocytes. Immunology, 94(March), pp.1925–1930. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Böhnlein E et al. , 1988. The same inducible nuclear proteins regulates mitogen activation of both the interleukin-2 receptor-alpha gene and type 1 HIV. Cell, 53(5), pp.827–836. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Borducchi EN et al. , 2016. Ad26/MVA therapeutic vaccination with TLR7 stimulation in SIV-infected rhesus monkeys. Nature, 540(7632), pp.284–287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Borrow P et al. , 1997. Antiviral pressure exerted by HIV-1-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) during primary infection demonstrated by rapid selection of CTL escape virus. Nature Medicine, 3(2), pp.205–211. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Borrow P et al. , 1994. Virus-Specific CD8+ Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Activity Associated with Control of Viremia in Primary Human-Immunodeficiency-Virus Type-1 Infection. Journal of Virology, 68(9), pp.6103–6110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Bouchat S et al. , 2015. Sequential treatment with 5-aza-2’-deoxycytidine and deacetylase inhibitors reactivates HIV- 1. EMBO Molecular Medicine, 8(2), pp.1–22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Bourgeois CF et al. , 2002. Spt5 cooperates with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 Tat by preventing premature RNA release at terminator sequences. Molecular and cellular biology, 22, pp.1079–93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Bournazos S et al. , 2014. Broadly neutralizing anti-HIV-1 antibodies require Fc effector functions for in vivo activity. Cell, 156(6), pp. 1243–1253. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Boritz EA et al. , 2016. Multiple Origins of Virus Persistence during Natural Control of HIV infection. Cell, 166, pp. 1004–1015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Brenchley JM et al. , 2004. CD4 + T Cell Depletion during all Stages of HIV Disease Occurs Predominantly in the Gastrointestinal Tract. The Journal of Experimental Medicine, 200(6), pp.749–759. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Bruel T et al. , 2015. Long-term control of simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) in cynomolgus macaques not associated with efficient SIV-specific CD8+ T-cell responses. Journal of virology, 89(7), pp.3542–3556. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Bruner KM et al. , 2016. Defective proviruses rapidly accumulate during acute HIV-1 infection., 22(9), pp.1043–1050. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Bucks CM et al. , 2009. Chronic Antigen Stimulation Alone Is Sufficient to Drive CD8+ T Cell Exhaustion. The Journal of Immunology, 182(11), pp.6697–6708. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Bui JK et al. , 2017. Proviruses with identical sequences comprise a large fraction of the replication-competent HIV reservoir. PLoS Pathogens, 13(3), pp. e1006283, [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Bullen CK et al. , 2014. New ex vivo approaches distinguish effective and ineffective single agents for reversing HIV-1 latency in vivo. Nature Medicine, 20(4), pp.425–429. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Burton DR & Hangartner L, 2016. Broadly Neutralizing Antibodies to HIV and Their Role in Vaccine Design. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Byrareddy SN et al. , 2016. Sustained virologic control in SIV+ macaques after antiretroviral and 4 7 antibody therapy. Science, 354(6309), pp.197–202. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Byrareddy SN et al. , 2014. Targeting α4β7 integrin reduces mucosal transmission of simian immunodeficiency virus and protects gut-associated lymphoid tissue from infection. Nature Medicine, 20(12), pp.1397–1400. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Calantone N et al. , 2014. Tissue myeloid cells in SIV-infected primates acquire viral DNA through phagocytosis of infected T cells. Immunity, 41(3), pp.493–502. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Cary DC, Fujinaga K, and Peterlin BM, 2016. Molecular mechanisms of HIV latency. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 126(2), pp. 448–454. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Caskey M, Klein F, Nussenzweig MC, 2016. Broadly Neutralizing Antibodies for HIV-1 Prevention or Immunotherapy. New England Journal of Medicine, pp.2019–2021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Cassidy SA, Cheent KS & Khakoo SI, 2014. Effects of peptide on NK cell-mediated MHC I recognition. Frontiers in Immunology, 5(133), pp.1–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Chan JKL & Greene WC, 2011. NF-κB/Rel: agonist and antagonist roles in HIV-1 latency. Current opinion in HIV and AIDS, 6, pp.12–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Chomont N et al. , 2009. HIV reservoir size and persistence are driven by T cell survival and homeostatic proliferation. Nature Medicine, 15(8), pp.893–900. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Chun T et al. , 2008. Persistence of HIV in GutAssociated Lymphoid Tissue despite LongTerm Antiretroviral Therapy. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 197(5), pp.714–720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Chun TW et al. , 1995. In vivo fate of HIV-1-infected T cells: Quantitative analysis of the transition to stable latency. Nature Medicine, 1(12), pp.1284–1290. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Chun et al. , 1997a. Quantification of latent tissue reservoirs and total body viral load in HIV-1 infection. Nature, 387(6629), pp.183–188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Chun et al. , 1997b. Presence of an inducible HIV-1 latent reservoir during highly active antiretroviral therapy. PNAS, 94(24), pp. 13193–13197. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Chun T-W et al. , 1998. Early establishment of a pool of latently infected, resting CD4+ T cells during primary HIV-1 infection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 95(15), pp. 8869–8873. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Chun et al. , 1999. Re-emergence of HIV after stopping therapy. Nature, 401, pp.874–875. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Churchill MJ et al. , 2006. Use of laser capture microdissection to detect integrated HIV-1 DNA in macrophages and astrocytes from autopsy brain tissues. Journal of NeuroVirology, 12(2), pp.146–152. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Cillo AR et al. , 2014. Quantification of HIV-1 latency reversal in resting CD4+ T cells from patients on suppressive antiretroviral therapy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(19), pp.7078–7083. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Ciudad MT et al. , 2016. Analysis of the HLA-DR peptidome from human dendritic cells reveals high affinity repertoires and nonconventional pathways of peptide generation. Journal of leukocyte biology, 101(February), pp.1–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Ciuffi A et al. , 2005. A role for LEDGF/p75 in targeting HIV DNA integration. Nature Medicine, 11, pp.1287–1289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Clayton KL et al. , 2017. HIV Infection of Macrophages: Implications for Pathogenesis and Cure. Pathogens and Immunity, 2(2), p.179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Cockerham LR et al. , 2014. Programmed death-1 expression on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in treated and untreated HIV disease. AIDS (London, England), 28(12), pp.1749–58. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Cohen GB et al. , 1999. The selective downregulation of class I major histocompatibility complex proteins by HIV-1 protects HIV-infected cells from NK cells. Immunity, 10(6), pp.661–671. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Cohn LB et al. , 2015. HIV-1 integration landscape during latent and active infection. Cell, 160(3), pp.420–432. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Cohn LB et al. , 2018. Clonal CD4+ T cells in the HIV-1 latent reservoir display a distinct gene profile upon reactivation. Nature Medicine doi: 10.1038/s41591-018-0017-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Coiras M et al. , 2009. Understanding HIV-1 latency provides clues for the eradication of long-term reservoirs. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 7(11), pp.798–812. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Connick E et al. , 2007. CTL Fail to Accumulate at Sites of HIV-1 Replication in Lymphoid Tissue. The Journal of Immunology, 178(11), pp.6975–6983. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Conway JM & Perelson AS, 2015. Post-treatment control of HIV infection. PNAS, 112(17), pp.5467–72. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Coull JJ et al. , 2000. The human factors YY1 and LSF repress the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 long terminal repeat via recruitment of histone deacetylase 1. Journal of virology, 74(15), pp.6790–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Cribbs SK et al. , 2015. Healthy HIV-1-Infected Individuals on HAART Harbor HIV-1 in their Alveolar Macrophages. AIDS research and human retroviruses, 31(1), pp.64–70. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Crooks AM et al. , 2015. Precise Quantitation of the Latent HIV-1 Reservoir: Implications for Eradication Strategies. Journal of Infectious Diseases, 212(9), pp.1361–1365. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Cummins NW et al. , 2016. Prime, Shock, and Kill: Priming CD4 T Cells from HIV Patients with a BCL-2 Antagonist before HIV Reactivation Reduces HIV Reservoir Size. Journal of Virology, 90(8), pp.4032–4048. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Dahabieh MS, Battivelli E & Verdin E, 2015. Understanding HIV Latency: The Road to an HIV Cure. Annu. Rev. Med, 66, pp.407–21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Dahl V et al. , 2014. Low levels of HIV-1 RNA detected in the cerebrospinal fluid after up to 10 years of suppressive therapy are associated with local immune activation. AIDS (London, England), 28(15), pp.2251–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Dar RD et al. , 2014. Screening for noise in gene expression identifies drug synergies. Science, 344(6190), pp.1392–1396. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Darcis G et al. , 2015. An In-Depth Comparison of Latency-Reversing Agent Combinations in Various In Vitro and Ex Vivo HIV-1 Latency Models Identified Bryostatin-1+JQ1 and Ingenol-B+JQ1 to Potently Reactivate Viral Gene Expression. PLoS Pathogens, 11(7), pp. e1005063. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Davey RT et al. , 1999. HIV-1 and T cell dynamics after interruption of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in patients with a history of sustained viral suppression. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 96(26), pp.15109–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Day CL et al. , 2006. PD-1 expression on HIV-specific T cells is associated with T-cell exhaustion and disease progression. Nature, 443(7109), pp.350–354. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Demoustier A et al. , 2002. In patients on prolonged HAART, a significant pool of HIV infected CD4 T cells are HIV-specific. AIDS, 16(13), pp.1749–1754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Deng K et al. , 2015. Broad CTL response is required to clear latent HIV-1 due to dominance of escape mutations. Nature, 517(7534), pp.381–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Descours et al. , 2017. CD32a is a marker of a CD4 T-cell HIV reservoir harbouring replication-competent proviruses. Nature, 543(7646), pp. 564–567. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. DiNapoli SR, Hirsch VM & Brenchley JM, 2016. Macrophages in Progressive Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Simian Immunodeficiency Virus Infections. Journal of virology, 90(17), pp.7596–606. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Dinoso JB et al. , 2009. Treatment intensification does not reduce residual HIV-1 viremia in patients on highly active antiretroviral therapy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(23), pp.9403–9408. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Doitsh G, et al. , 2010. Abortive HIV infection mediates CD4 T cell depletion and inflammation in human lymphoid tissue. Cell,143(5), pp.789–801. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Dornadula G et al. , 1999. Residual HIV-1 RNA in blood plasma of patients taking suppressive highly active antiretroviral therapy. JAMA, 282(17), pp.1627–1632. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  87. Douek DC et al. , 2002. HIV preferentially infects HIV-specific CD4+T cells. Nature, 417(6884), pp.95–98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Duh EJ et al. , 1989. Tumor necrosis factor alpha activates human immunodeficiency virus type 1 through induction of nuclear factor binding to the NF-kappa B sites in the long terminal repeat. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 86(15), pp.5974–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  89. Elliott JH et al. , 2014. Activation of HIV Transcription with Short-Course Vorinostat in HIV-Infected Patients on Suppressive Antiretroviral Therapy. PLoS Pathogens, 10(10), pp.e1004473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Farber DL, Yudanin NA & Restifo NP, 2014. Human memory T cells: generation, compartmentalization and homeostasis. Nature reviews. Immunology, 14(1), pp.24–35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Fehniger TA et al. , 2003. CD56bright natural killer cells are present in human lymph nodes and are activated by T cell-derived IL-2: A potential new link between adaptive and innate immunity. Blood, 101(8), pp.3052–3057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Ferlazzo G et al. , 2004. The Abundant NK Cells in Human Secondary Lymphoid Tissues Require Activation to Express Killer Cell Ig-Like Receptors and Become Cytolytic. The Journal of Immunology, 172(3), pp.1455–1462. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  93. Feng S, and Holland EC, 1988. HIV-1 tat trans-activation requires the loop sequence within tar. Nature, 334(6178), pp. 165–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  94. Festenstein R et al. , 2003. Modulation of heterochromatin protein 1 dynamics in primary Mammalian cells. Science (New York, NY), 299(5607), pp.719–721. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Finzi D et al. , 1997. Identification of a Reservoir for HIV-1 in Patients on Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Identification of a Reservoir for HIV-1 in Patients on Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy. Science, 278(5341), pp.1295–1300. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  96. Finzi D et al. , 1999. Latent infection of CD4+ T cells provides a mechanism for lifelong persistence of HIV-1, even in patients on effective combination therapy. Nature Medicine, 5(5), pp.1–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Frenkel LM et al. , 2003. Multiple viral genetic analyses detect low-level human immunodeficiency virus type 1 replication during effective highly active antiretroviral therapy. Journal of virology, 77(10), pp.5721–30. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  98. Fujinaga K et al. , 2004. Dynamics of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Transcription: P-TEFb Phosphorylates RD and Dissociates Negative Effectors from the Transactivation Response Element. Molecular and Cellular Biology, 24, pp.787–795. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  99. Fukazawa Y et al. , 2015. B cell follicle sanctuary permits persistent productive simian immunodeficiency virus infection in elite controllers. Nature Medicine, 21(2), pp.132–139. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  100. Fukazawa Y et al. , 2012. Lymph node T cell responses predict the efficacy of live attenuated SIV vaccines. Nature Medicine, 18(11), pp.1673–1681. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  101. Fulda S, 2015. Smac mimetics as IAP antagonists. Seminars in Cell and Developmental Biology, 39, pp.132–138. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  102. Fromentin R, et al. , 2016. CD4+T Cells Expressing PD-1, TIGIT and LAG-3 Contribute to HIV Persistence during ART. Plos Pathogens, 12(7): e1005761. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  103. Gandhi RT et al. , 2010. The effect of raltegravir intensification on low-level residual viremia in HIV-infected patients on antiretroviral therapy: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS Medicine, 7(8), pp.e1000321. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  104. Gandhi RT & Walker BD, 2002. Immunologic control of HIV-1. Annual review of medicine, 53, pp.149–72. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  105. Garcia-Vidal E et al. , 2017. Evaluation of the innate immune modulator acitretin as a strategy to clear the HIV reservoir. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 61(11), pp. e01368–17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  106. Gartner S et al. , 1986. The role of mononuclear phagocytes in HTLV-III/LAV infection. Science, 233(4760), pp.215–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  107. Gaudinski MR et al. , 2018. Safety and pharmacokinetics of the Fc-modified HIV-1 human monoclonal antibody VRC01LS: A Phase 1 open-label clinical trial in healthy adults. Plos medicine, 15(1): e1002493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  108. Gavegnano C et al. , 2017. Novel mechanisms to inhibit HIV reservoir seeding using Jak inhibitors. PLoS Pathogens, 13(12), pp.1–30. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  109. Gay CL et al. , 2017. Clinical trial of the anti-PD-L1 antibody BMS-936559 in HIV-1 infected participants on suppressive antiretroviral therapy. Journal of Infectious Diseases, 215(11), pp.1725–1733. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  110. Gerritsen ME et al. , 1997. CREB-binding protein/p300 are transcriptional coactivators of p65. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci, 94, pp.2927–2932. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  111. Ginhoux F & Guilliams M, 2016. Tissue-Resident Macrophage Ontogeny and Homeostasis. Immunity, 44(3), pp.439–449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  112. Goldstone DC et al. , 2011. HIV-1 restriction factor SAMHD1 is a deoxynucleoside triphosphate triphosphohydrolase. Nature, 480(7377), pp.379–382. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  113. Goonetilleke N et al. , 2009. The first T cell response to transmitted/founder virus contributes to the control of acute viremia in HIV-1 infection. The Journal of Experimental Medicine, 206(6), pp.1253–72. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  114. Gornalusse GG et al. , 2015. Epigenetic mechanisms, T-cell activation, and CCR5 genetics interact to regulate T-cell expression of CCR5, the major HIV-1 coreceptor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(34), pp.E4762–E4771. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  115. Gutiérrez C et al. , 2016. Bryostatin-1 for latent virus reactivation in HIV-infected patients on antiretroviral therapy. AIDS (London, England), 30(9), pp.1385–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  116. Guzzo C et al. , 2017. Virion incorporation of integrin α4β7 facilitates HIV-1 infection and intestinal homing. Science Immunology, 2(11), p.eaam7341. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  117. Halper-Stromberg A et al. , 2014. Broadly neutralizing antibodies and viral inducers decrease rebound from HIV-1 latent reservoirs in humanized mice. Cell, 158(5), pp.989–999. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  118. Hammarlund E et al. , 2010. Antiviral immunity following smallpox virus infection: a case-control study. Journal of virology, 84, pp.12754–60. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  119. Han Y et al. , 2007. Experimental approaches to the study of HIV-1 latency. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 5(2), pp. 95–106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  120. Han Y et al. , 2008. Orientation-Dependent Regulation of Integrated HIV-1 Expression by Host Gene Transcriptional Readthrough. Cell Host & Microbe, 14(4), pp.134–46. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  121. Han Y et al. , 2004. Resting CD4+ T cells from human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-infected individuals carry integrated HIV-1 genomes within actively transcribed host genes. Journal of virology, 78(12), pp.6122–33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  122. Hansen SG et al. , 2009. Effector memory T cell responses are associated with protection of rhesus monkeys from mucosal simian immunodeficiency virus challenge. Nature Medicine, 15(3), pp.293–299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  123. Hansen SG et al. , 2011. Profound early control of highly pathogenic SIV by an effector memory T-cell vaccine. Nature, 473(7348), pp. 523–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  124. Hansen SG et al. , 2013a. Immune clearance of highly pathogenic SIV infection. Nature, 502(7469), pp.100–104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  125. Hansen SG et al. , 2013b. Cytomegalovirus Vectors Violate CD8+ T Cell Epitope Recognition Paradigms. Science, 340(6135), pp.1237874. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  126. Hansen SG et al. , 2016. Broadly targeted CD8+ T cell responses restricted by major histocompatibility complex E. Science, 351(6274), pp. 714–720. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  127. Hashimoto M et al. , 2018. CD8 T Cell Exhaustion in Chronic Infection and Cancer: Opportunities for Interventions. Annual Review of Medicine, 69(1), pp.301–318. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  128. Henrich TJ et al. , 2014. Antiretroviral-Free HIV-1 Remission and Viral Rebound After Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 161(5), p.319. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  129. Henrich TJ et al. , 2017. Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Persistence Following Systemic Chemotherapy for Malignancy. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 216(2), pp. 254–262. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  130. Hermankova M et al. , 2003. Analysis of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 gene expression in latently infected resting CD4+ T lymphocytes in vivo. Journal of virology, 77(13), pp.7383–92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  131. Hersperger AR et al. , 2011. Qualitative features of the HIV-specific CD8+ T-cell response associated with immunologic control. Current Opinion in HIV and AIDS, 6(3), pp.169–173. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  132. Hiener B et al. , 2017. Identification of Genetically Intact HIV-1 Proviruses in Specific CD4 + T Cells from Effectively Treated Participants. Cell Reports, 21, pp.813–822. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  133. Hill AL, et al. , 2014. Predicting the outcomes of treatment to eradicate the latent reservoir for HIV-1. PNAS, 111(37), pp.13475–13480. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  134. Hill AL et al. , 2016. Real-Time Predictions of Reservoir Size and Rebound Time during Antiretroviral Therapy Interruption Trials for HIV. PLoS Pathogens, 12(4), pp. e1005535. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  135. Ho DD et al. , 1995. Rapid turnover of plasma virions and CD4 lymphocytes in HIV-1 infection. Nature, 373(6510), pp.123–126. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  136. Ho YC et al. , 2013. Replication-competent noninduced proviruses in the latent reservoir increase barrier to HIV-1 cure. Cell, 155(3), pp.540–551. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  137. Honeycutt JB et al. , 2017. HIV persistence in tissue macrophages of humanized myeloid-only mice during antiretroviral therapy. Nature Medicine, 23(5), pp. 638–643. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  138. Horwitz JA et al. , 2017. Non-neutralizing Antibodies Alter the Course of HIV-1 Infection In Vivo. Cell, 170(4), p.637–648. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  139. Hosmane NN et al. , 2017. Proliferation of latently infected CD4 + T cells carrying replication-competent HIV-1: Potential role in latent reservoir dynamics. The Journal of Experimental Medicine, 214(4), pp.959–972. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  140. Hsia SC & Shi YB, 2002. Chromatin disruption and histone acetylation in regulation of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 long terminal repeat by thyroid hormone receptor. Mol Cell Biol, 22, pp.4043–4052. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  141. Hua S et al. , 2017. Pegylated Interferon-α–Induced Natural Killer Cell Activation Is Associated With Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 DNA Decline in Antiretroviral Therapy–Treated HIV-1/Hepatitis C Virus–Coinfected Patients. Clinical Infectious Diseases. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  142. Huang SH et al. , 2018. Latent HIV reservoirs exhibit inherent resistance to elimination by CD8+t cells. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 128(2), pp.876–889. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  143. Huot N et al. , 2017. Natural killer cells migrate into and control simian immunodeficiency virus replication in lymph node follicles in African green monkeys. Nature Medicine, 23(11), pp.1277–1286. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  144. Hütter G et al. , 2009. Long-Term Control of HIV by CCR5 Delta32/Delta32 Stem-Cell Transplantation. New England Journal of Medicine, 360, pp.692–698. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  145. Igarashi T et al. , 2003. Macrophage-Tropic Simian/Human Immunodeficiency Virus Chimeras Use CXCR4, Not CCR5, for Infections of Rhesus Macaque Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells and Alveolar Macrophages. J. Virol, 77(24), pp.13042–13052. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  146. Im SJ et al. , 2016. Defining CD8+T cells that provide the proliferative burst after PD-1 therapy. Nature, 537(7620), pp.417–421. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  147. Imamichi H et al. , 2016. Defective HIV-1 proviruses produce novel protein-coding RNA species in HIV-infected patients on combination antiretroviral therapy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(31), pp.8783–8788. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  148. Irvine DJ et al. , 2002. Direct observation of ligand recognition by T cells. Nature, 419(6909), pp.845–849. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  149. Iwai Y, Terawaki S & Honjo T, 2005. PD-1 blockade inhibits hematogenous spread of poorly immunogenic tumor cells by enhanced recruitment of effector T cells. International Immunology, 17(2), pp.133–144. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  150. Jiang G & Dandekar S, 2015. Targeting NF-κB Signaling with Protein Kinase C Agonists As an Emerging Strategy for Combating HIV Latency. AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses, 31(1), pp.4–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  151. Jones RB et al. , 2016. A Subset of Latency-Reversing Agents Expose HIV-Infected Resting CD4+T-Cells to Recognition by Cytotoxic T-Lymphocytes. PLoS Pathogens, 12(4), pp.e1005545. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  152. Jones RB et al. , 2014. Histone deacetylase inhibitors impair the elimination of hiv-infected cells by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes. PLoS Pathogens, 10(8), pp. e1004287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  153. Jones RB et al. , 2008. Tim-3 expression defines a novel population of dysfunctional T cells with highly elevated frequencies in progressive HIV-1 infection. The Journal of Experimental Medicine, 205(12), pp.2763–2779. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  154. Joosten SA, Sullivan LC & Ottenhoff THM, 2016. Characteristics of HLA-E Restricted T-Cell Responses and Their Role in Infectious Diseases. J Immunol Res, 2016(2695396), pp. 1–11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  155. Jordan A, Defechereux P & Verdin E, 2001. The site of HIV-1 integration in the human genome determines basal transcriptional activity and response to Tat transactivation. EMBO Journal, 20(7), pp.1726–1738. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  156. Josefsson L et al. , 2013. The HIV-1 reservoir in eight patients on long-term suppressive antiretroviral therapy is stable with few genetic changes over time. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(51), pp.E4987–96. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  157. Kader M et al. , 2009. α4+β7hiCD4+ memory T cells harbor most Th-17 cells and are preferentially infected during acute SIV infection. Mucosal Immunology, 2(5), pp.439–449. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  158. Kahan SM, Wherry EJ & Zajac AJ, 2015. T cell exhaustion during persistent viral infections. Virology, 479–480, pp.180–193. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  159. Kalams SA et al. , 1999. Association between virus-specific cytotoxic T-lymphocyte and helper responses in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection. Journal of virology, 73(8), pp.6715–6720. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  160. Kamphorst AO et al. , 2017. Proliferation of PD-1+ CD8 T cells in peripheral blood after PD-1–targeted therapy in lung cancer patients. PNAS, 114(19), pp.4993–4998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  161. Kandathil AJ, Sugawara S & Balagopal A, 2016. Are T cells the only HIV-1 reservoir. Retrovirology, 13(1), pp.1–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  162. Kao S-Y et al. , 1987. Anti-termination of transcription within the long terminal repeat of HIV-1 by tat gene product. Nature, 330(6147), pp.489–493. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  163. Karn J, 2011. The molecular biology of HIV latency: breaking and restoring the Tat-dependent transcriptional circuit. Current Opinion in HIV and AIDS, 6, pp.4–11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  164. Kauder SE et al. , 2009. Epigenetic regulation of HIV-1 latency by cytosine methylation. PLoS Pathogens, 5(6), pp. e1000495. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  165. Kaufmann GR et al. , 2004. Long-term virological response to multiple sequential regimens of highly active antiretroviral therapy for HIV infection. Antiviral Therapy, 9(2), pp.263–274. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  166. Kearney MF et al. , 2014. Lack of Detectable HIV-1 Molecular Evolution during Suppressive Antiretroviral Therapy. PLoS Pathogens, 10(3). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  167. El Kharroubi A et al. , 1998. Transcriptional activation of the integrated chromatin-associated human immunodeficiency virus type 1 promoter. Molecular and cellular biology, 18(5), pp.2535–2544. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  168. Kieffer TL et al. , 2004. Genotypic Analysis of HIV1 Drug Resistance at the Limit of Detection: Virus Production without Evolution in Treated Adults with Undetectable HIV Loads. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 189(8), pp.1452–1465. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  169. Kim Y, Anderson JL & Lewin SR, 2018. Getting the “Kill” into “Shock and Kill”: Strategies to Eliminate Latent HIV. Cell Host Microbe, 23(1), pp. 14–26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  170. Kiniry B et al. , 2017. Predominance of Weakly Cytotoxic, T-betLow EomesNeg CD8+ T-cells in Human Gastrointestinal Mucosa: Implications for HIV Infection. Mucosal Immunology, 10(4), pp.1008–1020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  171. Kinoshita S et al. , 1998. Host control of HIV-1 parasitism in T cells by the nuclear factor of activated T cells. Cell, 95(5), pp.595–604. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  172. Koizumi Y et al. , 2017. Quantifying antiviral activity optimizes drug combinations against hepatitis C virus infection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(8), pp. 1922–1927. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  173. Koup RA et al. , 1994. Temporal association of cellular immune responses with the initial control of viremia in primary human immunodeficiency virus type 1 syndrome. Journal of virology, 68(7), pp.4650–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  174. Kreitman RJ, 2006. Immunotoxins for targeted cancer therapy. The AAPS Journal, 8(3), pp.E532–E551. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  175. Kulkosky J et al. , 2002. Intensification and Stimulation Therapy for Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Reservoirs in Infected Persons Receiving Virally Suppressive Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy. Journal of Infectious Diseases, 186(10), pp.1403–11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  176. Kwaa AK et al. , 2017. The effect of Ingenol-B on the suppressive capacity of elite suppressor HIV-specific CD8+ T cells. PLOS ONE, 12(5), p.e0174516. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  177. Kwong PD et al. , 2002. HIV-1 evades antibody-mediated neutralization through conformational masking of receptor-binding sites. Nature, 420(6916), pp.678–682. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  178. Laguette N et al. , 2011. SAMHD1 is the dendritic- and myeloid-cell-specific HIV-1 restriction factor counteracted by Vpx. Nature, 474(7353), pp.654–657. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  179. Laird GM et al. , 2015. Ex vivo analysis identifies effective HIV-1 latency-reversing drug combinations. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 125(5), pp.1901–1912. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  180. Lambotte O et al. , 2005. HIV Controllers: A Homogeneous Group of HIV-1--Infected Patients with Spontaneous Control of Viral Replication. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 41, pp.1053–1056. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  181. Larder B, Darby G & Richman D, 1989. HIV with reduced sensitivity to zidovudine (AZT) isolated during prolonged therapy. Science, 243(4899), pp.1731–1734. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  182. Laskey SB& Siliciano RF, 2014. A mechanistic theory to explain the efficacy of antiretroviral therapy. Nat Rev Microbiol. 12(11), pp:772–780. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  183. Lassen KG et al. , 2006. Nuclear retention of multiply spliced HIV-1 RNA in resting CD4+T cells. PLoS Pathogens, 2(7), pp.0650–0661. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  184. Laughlin MA et al. , 1993. Sodium Butyrate Treatment of Cells Latently Infected with HIV-1 Results in the Expression of Unspliced Viral RNA. Virology, 196, pp.496–505. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  185. Lee GQ et al. , 2017. Clonal expansion of genome-intact HIV-1 in functionally polarized Th1 CD4+ T cells. The Journal of clinical investigation, 127(7), pp.2689–2696. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  186. Lehrman G et al. , 2005. Depletion of latent HIV-1 infection in vivo: A proof-of-concept study. Lancet, 366(9485), pp.549–555. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  187. Lenardo MJ et al. , 2002. Cytopathic Killing of Peripheral Blood CD4 + T Lymphocytes by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Appears Necrotic rather than Apoptotic and Does Not Require env. Journal of Virology, 76(10), pp.5082–5093. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  188. Lenasi T, Contreras X & Peterlin BM, 2008. Transcriptional Interference Antagonizes Proviral Gene Expression to Promote HIV Latency. Cell Host and Microbe, 4(2), pp.123–133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  189. Lerner P et al. , 2011. The Gut Mucosal Viral Reservoir in HIV-Infected Patients Is Not the Major Source of Rebound Plasma Viremia following Interruption of Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy. Journal of Virology, 85(10), pp.4772–4782. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  190. Leth S et al. , 2016. Combined effect of Vacc-4×, recombinant human granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor vaccination, and romidepsin on the HIV-1 reservoir (REDUC): a single-arm, phase 1B/2A trial. The Lancet HIV, 3(10), pp.e463–e472. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  191. Li P et al. , 2016. Stimulating the RIG-I pathway to kill cells in the latent HIV reservoir following viral reactivation. Nature Medicine, 22(7), pp.807–811. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  192. Lindqvist M et al. , 2012. Expansion of HIV-specific T follicular helper cells in chronic HIV infection. The Journal of clinical investigation, 122(9), pp.3271–80. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  193. van Lint C et al. , 1996. Transcriptional activation and chromatin remodeling of the HIV-1 promoter in response to histone acetylation. The EMBO journal, 15, pp.1112–20. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  194. van Lint C, Bouchat S & Marcello A, 2013. HIV-1 transcription and latency: an update. Retrovirology, 10, p.67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  195. Lopez-Vergès S et al. , 2011. Expansion of a unique CD57+NKG2Chi natural killer cell subset during acute human cytomegalovirus infection. PNAS, 108(36), pp.14725–14732. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  196. Lorenzi JCC et al. , 2016. Paired quantitative and qualitative assessment of the replication-competent HIV-1 reservoir and comparison with integrated proviral DNA. PNAS, 113(49), pp.E7908–E7916. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  197. Lorenzo-Redondo R et al. , 2016. Persistent HIV-1 replication maintains the tissue reservoir during therapy. Nature, 530(7588), pp.51–56. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  198. Louveau A et al. , 2015. Structural and functional features of central nervous system lymphatic vessels. Nature, 523(7560), pp.337–341. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  199. Lu C et al. , 2016. Enhanced clearance of HIV-1-infected cells by broadly neutralizing antibodies against HIV-1 in vivo. Science, 352(6288), pp.1001–1005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  200. Lu P et al. , 2017. BET inhibitors RVX-208 and PFI-1 reactivate HIV-1 from latency. Scientific Reports, 7(1), pp.1–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  201. Lucas A et al. , 2010. Targeting the PI3K/AKT cell survival pathway to induce cell death of HIV-1 infected macrophages with alkylphospholipid compounds. PLoS ONE, 5(9), pp.e13121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  202. Luzuriaga K et al. , 2015. Viremic Relapse after HIV-1 Remission in a Perinatally Infected Child. New England Journal of Medicine, 372(8), pp.786–788. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  203. Lynch RM et al. , 2015. Virologic effects of broadly neutralizing antibody VRC01 administration during chronic HIV-1 infection. Science Translational Medicine, 7(319). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  204. Maartens G et al. , 2014. Seminar HIV infection : epidemiology, pathogenesis, treatment, and prevention. The Lancet, 384(9939), pp.258–271. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  205. Maldarelli F et al. , 2007. ART suppresses plasma HIV-1 RNA to a stable set point predicted by pretherapy viremia. PLoS Pathogens, 3(4), pp.484–488. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  206. Maldarelli F et al. , 2014. Specific HIV integration sites are linked to clonal expansion and persistence of infected cells. Science, 345(6193), pp.179–183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  207. Mancebo HSY et al. , 1997. P-TEFb kinase is required for HIV Tat transcriptional activation in vivo and in vitro. Genes and Development, 11(20), pp.2633–2644. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  208. Marban C et al. , 2016. Targeting the brain reservoirs: Toward an HIV cure. Frontiers in Immunology, 7(397), pp. 1–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  209. Martín-Fontecha A et al. , 2004. Induced recruitment of NK cells to lymph nodes provides IFN-gamma for T(H)1 priming. Nature immunology, 5(12), pp.1260–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  210. Martin AR et al. , 2017. Rapamycin-mediated mTOR inhibition uncouples HIV-1 latency reversal from cytokine-associated toxicity. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 127(2), pp.651–656. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  211. McGary CS et al. , 2017. CTLA-4+PD-1- Memory CD4+ T Cells Critically Contribute to Viral Persistence in Antiretroviral Therapy-Suppressed, SIV-Infected Rhesus Macaques. Immunity, 47(4), pp.776–788. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  212. McMahon D et al. , 2010. Short-course raltegravir intensification does not reduce persistent low-level viremia in patients with HIV-1 suppression during receipt of combination antiretroviral therapy. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 50(6), pp.912–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  213. Meehan AM et al. , 2009. LEDGF/p75 Proteins with Alternative Chromatin Tethers Are Functional HIV-1 Cofactors Luban J, ed. PLoS Pathogens, 5, p.e1000522. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  214. Mellors JW et al. , 1996. Prognosis in HIV-1 infection predicted by the quantity of virus in plasma. Science, 272(5264), pp. 1167–1170 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  215. Migueles SA & Connors M, 2015. Success and failure of the cellular immune response against HIV-1. Nature Immunology, 16(6), pp.563–570. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  216. Mikell I et al. , 2011. Characteristics of the earliest cross-neutralizing antibody response to HIV-1. PLoS Pathogens, 7(1), pp.e1001251. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  217. Molitor JA et al. , 1990. NF-kappa B: a family of inducible and differentially expressed enhancer-binding proteins in human T cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 87(24). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  218. Mujib S, Liu J, et al. , 2017. Comprehensive Cross-Clade Characterization of Antibody-Mediated Recognition, Complement-Mediated Lysis, and Cell-Mediated Cytotoxicity of HIV-1 Envelope-Specific Antibodies toward Eradication of the HIV-1 Reservoir. Journal of Virology, 91(16), pp.e00634–17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  219. Mujib S, Saiyed A, et al. , 2017. Pharmacologic HIV-1 Nef blockade promotes CD8 T cell – mediated elimination of latently HIV-1 – infected cells in vitro. JCI Insight, 2(17), pp.1–18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  220. Nabel and Baltimore, 1987. An inducible transcription factor activates expression of human immunodeficiency virus in T cells. Nature, 326(6114), pp.711–713. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  221. Ne E, Palstra RJ & Mahmoudi T, 2018. Transcription: Insights From the HIV-1 Promoter 1st ed., Elsevier Inc. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  222. Nettles RE et al. , 2005. Intermittent HIV-1 viremia (blips) and drug resistance in patients receiving HAART. Journal of the American Medical Association, 293(7), pp.817–829. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  223. Neumann S et al. , 2015. How do viruses control mitochondria-mediated apoptosis? Virus Research, 209, pp.45–55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  224. O’Connell KA et al. , 2009. Role of natural killer cells in a cohort of elite suppressors: low frequency of the protective KIR3DS1 allele and limited inhibition of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 replication in vitro. Journal of virology, 83, pp.5028–34. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  225. Olesen R et al. , 2015. Innate Immune Activity Correlates with CD4 T Cell-Associated HIV-1 DNA Decline during Latency-Reversing Treatment with Panobinostat. Journal of Virology, 89(20), pp.10176–10189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  226. Pankrac J, Klein K & Mann JFS, 2017. Eradication of HIV-1 latent reservoirs through therapeutic vaccination. AIDS Research and Therapy, 14(1), pp. 45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  227. Parada CA & Roeder RG, 1996. Enhanced processivity of RNA polymerase II triggered by Tat-induced phosphorylation of its carboxy-terminal domain. Nature, 384, pp.375–378. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  228. Peng H & Tian Z, 2017. Natural killer cell memory: Progress and implications. Frontiers in Immunology, 8(1143), pp.1–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  229. Peng J et al. , 1998. Identification of multiple cyclin subunits of human P-TEFb. Genes and Development, 12(5), pp.755–762. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  230. Perelson AS et al. , 1997. Decay characteristics of HIV-1-infected compartments during combination therapy. Nature, 387(6629), pp.188–191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  231. Perreau M et al. , 2013. Follicular helper T cells serve as the major CD4 T cell compartment for HIV-1 infection, replication, and production. The Journal of Experimental Medicine, 210(1), pp.143–156. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  232. Persaud D et al. , 2013. Absence of Detectable HIV-1 Viremia after Treatment Cessation in an Infant. New England Journal of Medicine, 369(19), pp.1828–1835. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  233. Peterlin BM & Price DH, 2006. Controlling the elongation phase of transcription with P-TEFb. Molecular cell, 23(3), pp.297–305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  234. Petrovas C et al. , 2006. PD-1 is a regulator of virus-specific CD8+ T cell survival in HIV infection. The Journal of Experimental Medicine, 203(10), pp.2281–92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  235. Petrovas C et al. , 2012. CD4 T follicular helper cell dynamics during SIV infection. The Journal of Clinical Investigation, 122(9), pp.3281–3294. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  236. Petrovas C et al. , 2017. HIV Follicular CD8 T cells accumulate in HIV infection and can kill infected cells in vitro via bispecific antibodies. Science Translational Medicine, 9(373), pp.1–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  237. Piatak M et al. , 1993. High levels of HIV-1 in plasma during all stages of infection determined by competitive PCR. Science, 259(5102), pp.1749–1754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  238. Pierson T et al. , 2000. Characterization of chemokine receptor utilization of viruses in the latent reservoir for human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Journal of virology, 74(17), pp.7824–33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  239. Pitcher CJ et al. , 1999. HIV-1-specific CD4+ T cells are detectable in most individuals with active HIV-1 infection, but decline with prolonged vital suppression. Nature Medicine, 5(5), pp.518–525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  240. Pollack RA et al. , 2017. Defective HIV-1 Proviruses Are Expressed and Can Be Recognized by Cytotoxic T Lymphocytes, which Shape the Proviral Landscape. Cell Host and Microbe, 21(4), p.494–506. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  241. Poon B et al. , 1998. Cell cycle arrest by Vpr in HIV-1 virions and insensitivity to antiretroviral agents. Science, 281(5374), pp.266–269. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  242. Price DA et al. , 1997. Positive selection of HIV-1 cytotoxic T lymphocyte escape variants during primary infection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 94(5), pp. 1890–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  243. Prins JM et al. , 1999. Immuno-activation with anti-CD3 and recombinant human IL-2 in HIV-1-infected patients on potent antiretroviral therapy. AIDS (London, England), 13(17), pp.2405–10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  244. Raha T, Cheng SWG & Green MR, 2005. HIV-1 Tat stimulates transcription complex assembly through recruitment of TBP in the absence of TAFs. PLoS Biology, 3(2), pp.e44. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  245. Rainho JN et al. , 2015. Nef Is Dispensable for Resistance of Simian Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Macrophages to CD8 + T Cell Killing. Journal of Virology, 89(20), pp.10625–10636. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  246. Ramsuran V et al. , 2018. Elevated HLA-A expression impairs HIV control through inhibition of NKG2A-expressing cells. Science, 359(6371), pp.86–90. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  247. Rasmussen TA et al. , 2014. Panobinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, for latent-virus reactivation in HIV-infected patients on suppressive antiretroviral therapy: a phase 1/2, single group, clinical trial. The Lancet HIV, 1(1), pp.e13–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  248. Reeves RK et al. , 2015. Antigen-specific NK cell memory in rhesus macaques. Nature immunology, 16(9), pp.927–32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  249. Rerks-Ngarm S et al. , 2009. Vaccination with ALVAC and AIDSVAX to Prevent HIV-1 Infection in Thailand. New England Journal of Medicine, 361(23), pp.2209–2220. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  250. Reuter MA et al. , 2017. HIV-Specific CD8+T Cells Exhibit Reduced and Differentially Regulated Cytolytic Activity in Lymphoid Tissue. Cell Reports, 21(12), pp.3458–3470. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  251. Rice AP, 2017. The HIV-1 Tat protein: mechanism of action and target for HIV-1 cure strategies. Current pharmaceutical design, 23, pp.1–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  252. Richman DD et al. , 2009. The challenge of finding a cure for HIV infection. Science, 323(5919), pp.1304–1307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  253. Rosenbloom DIS et al. , 2017. Re-evaluating evolution in the HIV reservoir. Nature, 551(530), pp.51–56. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  254. Roshal M et al. , 2003. Activation of the ATR-mediated DNA damage response by the HIV-1 viral protein R. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 278(28), pp.25879–25886. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  255. Rothenberger MK et al. , 2015. Large number of rebounding/founder HIV variants emerge from multifocal infection in lymphatic tissues after treatment interruption. PNAS, 112(10), pp.E1126–E1134. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  256. Russell RA, et al. , 2017. Astrocytes Resist HIV-1 Fusion but Engulf Infected Macrophage Material. Cell Reports, 18(6), pp.1473–1483. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  257. Sakai K, Dimas J & Lenardo MJ, 2006. The Vif and Vpr accessory proteins independently cause HIV-1-induced T cell cytopathicity and cell cycle arrest. PNAS, 103(9), pp.3369–3374. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  258. Saleh S, et al. , 2007. CCR7 ligands CCL19 and CCL21 increase permissiveness of resting memory CD4+ T cells to HIV-1 infection: a novel model of HIV-1 latency. Blood, 110(13):4161–4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  259. Sather DN et al. , 2009. Factors associated with the development of cross-reactive neutralizing antibodies during human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection. Journal of virology, 83(2), pp.757–69. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  260. Scheid JF et al. , 2016. HIV-1 antibody 3BNC117 suppresses viral rebound in humans during treatment interruption. Nature, 535(7613), pp.556–560. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  261. Schmitz JE et al. , 1999. Control of viremia in simian immunodeficiency virus infection by CD8+ lymphocytes. Science, 283, pp.857–860. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  262. Schoofs T et al. , 2016. HIV-1 therapy with monoclonal antibody 3BNC117 elicits host immune responses against HIV-1. Science, 352(6288), pp.997–1001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  263. Schröder ARW et al. , 2002. HIV-1 integration in the human genome favors active genes and local hotspots. Cell, 110(4), pp.521–529. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  264. Sedaghat AR et al. , 2007. Limits on replenishment of the resting CD4+T cell reservoir for HIV in patients on HAART. PLoS Pathogens, 3(8), pp.1165–1174. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  265. Shan L, et al. , 2011. Influence of host gene transcription level and orientation on HIV-1 latency in a primary-cell model. Journal of Virology, 85(11), pp. 5384–93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  266. Shan L et al. , 2012. Stimulation of HIV-1-Specific Cytolytic T Lymphocytes Facilitates Elimination of Latent Viral Reservoir after Virus Reactivation. Immunity, 36(3), pp.491–501. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  267. Shan L et al. , 2017. Transcriptional Reprogramming during Effector-to-Memory Transition Renders CD4+T Cells Permissive for Latent HIV-1 Infection. Immunity, 47(4), p.766–775.e3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  268. Shasha D & Walker BD, 2013. Lessons to be Learned from Natural Control of HIV – Future Directions, Therapeutic, and Preventive Implications. Frontiers in Immunology, 4(162), pp. 1–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  269. Shedlock DJ et al. , 2008. HIV-1 viral genes and mitochondrial apoptosis. Apoptosis, 13(9), pp.1088–1099. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  270. Shedlock DJ, Silvestri G & Weiner DB, 2009. Monkeying around with HIV vaccines: Using rhesus macaques to define “gatekeepers” for clinical trials. Nature Reviews Immunology, 9(10), pp.717–728. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  271. Siekevitz M et al. , 1987. Activation of the HIV-1 LTR by T cell mitogens and the trans-activator protein of HTLV-I. Science (New York, N.Y.), 238(4833), pp.1575–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  272. Siliciano JD et al. , 2003. Long-term follow-up studies confirm the stability of the latent reservoir for HIV-1 in resting CD4+ T cells. Nature medicine, 9(6), pp.727–728. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  273. Siliciano JD et al. , 2007. Stability of the Latent Reservoir for HIV1 in Patients Receiving Valproic Acid. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 195(6), pp.833–836. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  274. Siliciano RF & Greene WC, 2011. HIV Latency. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine, pp.1–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  275. Simonetti FR et al. , 2016. Clonally expanded CD4 + T cells can produce infectious HIV-1 in vivo. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(7), pp.1883–1888. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  276. Slingluff CL, 2011. The present and future of peptide vaccines for cancer: single or multiple, long or short, alone or in combination? Cancer J, 17(5), pp.343–50. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  277. Sloan DD et al. , 2015. Targeting HIV Reservoir in Infected CD4 T Cells by Dual-Affinity Re-targeting Molecules (DARTs) that Bind HIV Envelope and Recruit Cytotoxic T Cells. PLoS Pathogens, 11(11). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  278. Sodroski J et al. , 1985. Trans-acting transcriptional regulation of human T-cell leukemia virus type III long terminal repeat. Science, 227(4683), pp.171–3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  279. Søgaard OS et al. , 2015. The Depsipeptide Romidepsin Reverses HIV-1 Latency In Vivo. PLoS Pathogens, 11(9), pp.1–22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  280. Spivak AM et al. , 2016. Janus kinase inhibition suppresses PKC-induced cytokine release without affecting HIV-1 latency reversal ex vivo. Retrovirology, 13(1), pp. 88. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  281. Spivak AM & Planelles V, 2018. Novel Latency Reversal Agents for HIV-1 Cure. Annual Review of Medicine, 69, pp.421–436. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  282. Stewart SA et al. , 2000. Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 vpr induces apoptosis through caspase activation. Journal of virology, 74(7), pp.3105–3111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  283. Strain MC et al. , 2003. Heterogeneous clearance rates of long-lived lymphocytes infected with HIV: Intrinsic stability predicts lifelong persistence. PNAS, 100(8), pp.4819–24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  284. Streeck H et al. , 2008. Antigen load and viral sequence diversification determine the functional profile of HIV-1-specific CD8+ T cells. PLoS Medicine, 5(5), pp.0790–0803. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  285. Sung JA et al. , 2015a. Expanded cytotoxic T-cell lymphocytes target the latent HIV reservoir. In Journal of Infectious Diseases. pp. 258–263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  286. Sung JA et al. , 2015b. Dual-Affinity Re-Targeting proteins direct T cell-mediated cytolysis of latently HIV-infected cells. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 125(11), pp.4077–4090. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  287. Sung JA et al. , 2017. Vorinostat Renders the Replication-Competent Latent Reservoir of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Vulnerable to Clearance by CD8 T Cells. EBioMedicine, 23, pp.52–58. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  288. Takaki A et al. , 2000. Cellular immune responses persist and humoral responses decrease twodecades after recovery from a single-source outbreak of hepatitis C. Nature Medicine, 6, pp.578–582. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  289. Tamaru H, 2010. Confining euchromatin/heterochromatin territory: jumonji crosses the line. Genes & development, 24, pp.1465–78. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  290. Tapia G et al. , 2017. Sequential Vacc-4× and romidepsin during combination antiretroviral therapy (cART): Immune responses to Vacc-4× regions on p24 and changes in HIV reservoirs. Journal of Infection, 75(6), pp.555–571. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  291. Thananchai H et al. , 2007. Cutting Edge: Allele-Specific and Peptide-Dependent Interactions between KIR3DL1 and HLA-A and HLA-B. The Journal of Immunology, 178(1), pp.33–37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  292. Thompson KA et al. , 2011. Brain cell reservoirs of latent virus in presymptomatic HIV-infected individuals. American Journal of Pathology, 179(4), pp.1623–1629. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  293. Tobin NH et al. , 2005. Evidence that Low-Level Viremias during Effective Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Result from Two Processes: Expression of Archival Virus and Replication of Virus. Journal of Virology, 79(15), pp.9625–9634. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  294. Trautmann L et al. , 2006. Upregulation of PD-1 expression on HIV-specific CD8+T cells leads to reversible immune dysfunction. Nature Medicine, 12(10), pp.1198–1202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  295. Tsai A et al. , 2017. Toll-Like Receptor 7 Agonist GS-9620 Induces HIV Expression and HIV-Specific Immunity in Cells from HIV-Infected Individuals on Suppressive Antiretroviral Therapy. Journal of Virology, 91(8), pp.e02166–16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  296. Veazey RS, 1998. Gastrointestinal Tract as a Major Site of CD4+ T Cell Depletion and Viral Replication in SIV Infection. Science, 280(5362), pp.427–431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  297. Verdin E et al. , 1993. Chromatin disruption in the promoter of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 during transcriptional activation. The EMBO journal, 12, pp.3249–59. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  298. Vojnov L et al. , 2012. The Majority of Freshly Sorted Simian Immunodeficiency Virus (SIV)-Specific CD8 + T Cells Cannot Suppress Viral Replication in SIV-Infected Macrophages. Journal of Virology, 86(8), pp.4682–4687. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  299. Wagner TA et al. , 2014. Proliferation of cells with HIV integrated into cancer genes contributes to persistent infection. Science, 345(6196), pp.570–573. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  300. Walker-Sperling VE et al. , 2016. The Effect of Latency Reversal Agents on Primary CD8+ T Cells: Implications for Shock and Kill Strategies for Human Immunodeficiency Virus Eradication. EBioMedicine, 8, pp.217–229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  301. Walker B & McMichael A, 2012. The T-Cell Response to HIV. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med, 2(a007054), pp.1–20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  302. Walker BD et al. , 1987. HIV-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes in seropositive individuals. Nature, 328(6128), pp.345–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  303. Wang Z et al. , 2018. Expanded cellular clones carrying replication- competent HIV-1 persist, wax, and wane. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci, 15(11). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  304. Wei P et al. , 1998. A novel CDK9-associated C-type cyclin interacts directly with HIV-1 Tat and mediates its high-affinity, loop-specific binding to TAR RNA. Cell, 92(4), pp.451–462. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  305. Wei X et al. , 2002. Emergence of resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 in patients receiving fusion inhibitor (T-20) monotherapy. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 46(6), pp.1896–905. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  306. Wei X et al. , 1995. Viral dynamics in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection. Nature, 373(6510), pp.117–122. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  307. Weinberger LS & Burnett JC, 2005. Stochastic Gene Expression in a Lentiviral Positive-Feedback Loop: HIV-1 Tat Fluctuations Drive Phenotypic Diversity. Cell, 122, pp.169–182. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  308. Wherry EJ, et al. , 2007. Molecular signature of CD8+T cell exhaustion during chronic viral infection. Immunity, 27(4), pp. 670–84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  309. Wherry EJ & Kurachi M, 2015. Molecular and cellular insights into T cell exhaustion. Nature Reviews Immunology, 15(8), pp.486–499. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  310. Whitney JB et al. , 2014. Rapid seeding of the viral reservoir prior to SIV viraemia in rhesus monkeys. Nature, 512, pp.74–77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  311. Williams SA et al. , 2006. NF-κB p50 promotes HIV latency through HDAC recruitment and repression of transcriptional initiation. EMBO Journal, 25(1), pp.139–149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  312. Wilson CC et al. , 2017. Development of a DNA Vaccine Designed to Induce Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte Responses to Multiple Conserved Epitopes in HIV-1. [DOI] [PubMed]
  313. Wong JK et al. , 1997. Recovery of replication-competent HIV despite prolonged suppression of plasma viremia. Science, 278(5341), pp.1291–1295. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  314. Xu L et al. , 2017. Trispecific broadly neutralizing HIV antibodies mediate potent SHIV protection in macaques. Science, 358(6359), pp.85–90. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  315. Yang H-C et al. , 2009. Small-molecule screening using a human primary cell model of HIV latency identifies compounds that reverse latency without cellular activation. The Journal of clinical investigation, 119(11), pp.3473–86. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  316. Yukl SA et al. , 2014. A comparison of methods for measuring rectal HIV levels suggests that HIV DNA resides in cells other than CD4+ T cells, including myeloid cells. AIDS (London, England), 28, pp.439–42. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  317. Zajac AJ et al. , 1998. Viral Immune Evasion Due to Persistence of Activated T Cells Without Effector Function. The Journal of Experimental Medicine, 188(12), pp.2205–2213. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  318. Zalar A et al. , 2010. Macrophage HIV-1 infection in duodenal tissue of patients on long term HAART. Antiviral Research, 87(2), pp.269–271. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  319. Zhu Y et al. , 1997. Transcription elongation factor P-TEFb is required for HIV-1 Tat transactivation in vitro. Genes and Development, 11(20), pp.2622–2632. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  320. Van Zyl GU et al. , 2017. No evidence of HIV replication in children on antiretroviral therapy. Journal of Clinical Investigation. pp. 3827–3834. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES