Binding
studies were performed using recombinant E1 and E2 glycoproteins in the presence of anti-receptor or control antibodies. As shown in Fig. 6B, anti-CD81, anti–SR-BI and anti-CLDN1 antibodies inhibited the binding of E2 to Huh7.5.1 cells. In contrast, preimmune or unrelated control serum had no effect (Fig. 6A-C). Similar results were obtained for antibody inhibition of E2 binding to BRL-3A rat hepatocyte–derived cells engineered to express the three human entry cofactors, HSP activation SR-BI, CD81, and CLDN124 (Fig. 6E). Expression of SR-BI, CD81, and CLDN1 on the cell surface of stably transfected BRL-3A cells was confirmed by flow cytometry, and expression levels were comparable to Huh7 cells (data not shown and Dreux et al.24). Interestingly, buy Crizotinib the magnitude of inhibition of E2 binding to Huh7.5.1 cells (Fig. 6C) correlated with the magnitude of inhibition of HCV infection (Fig. 3B), suggesting that inhibition of binding of E2-cell surface interactions provides a mechanism of action for the neutralizing activity of the anti-CLDN1 antibodies. In contrast, E1 binding was not affected by anti-CLDN1 (Fig. 6D). To investigate whether inhibition of E2 binding resulted in an inhibition of binding of infectious virions, we studied cellular binding of Jc1 HCVcc in the presence of anti-CLDN1 antibodies. Although HCVcc binding analyses were characterized by a higher interassay variability compared with
E2 binding studies, anti-CLDN1 antibodies markedly and significantly inhibited HCVcc binding to Huh7.5.1 cells (Fig. 6F). To study whether antibody inhibition of E2 binding to permissive cell lines was attributable to CLDN1 interactions with E2, we investigated whether CLDN1 was able to bind recombinant truncated glycoprotein E2. To address this question, CHO cells were engineered to express human CLDN1, SR-BI, or CD81 (Fig. 7A). Cell surface expression of human CD81 or human SR-BI conferred E2 binding click here to CHO cells (Fig. 7B),
whereas CLDN1 expression had no effect (Fig. 7B). These data suggest that CLDN1 does not interact directly with HCV envelope glycoprotein E2 and that antibody blocking of E2-cell surface interactions may be mediated by indirect mechanisms. Because anti-CLDN1 inhibits E2 binding to HCV permissive cells in the absence of a direct CLDN1-E2 interaction (Fig. 7B), we hypothesized that anti-CLDN1 antibodies may interfere with CD81-CLDN1 coreceptor complexes. To assess whether anti-CLDN1 antibodies alter CLDN1-CD81 association, 293T cells were transfected to express AcGFP-CD81 and DsRED-CD81, AcGFP-CLDN1 and DsRED-CD81, or AcGFP-CLDN1 and DsRED-CLDN1,17 incubated with preimmune and anti-CLDN1 serum (1/100 and 1/400) and coreceptor interactions analyzed by fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET). As shown in Fig. 8, anti-CLDN1 antibodies significantly reduced FRET between CD81 and CLDN1 in a dose-dependent manner.