Cleavage by CD26/dipeptidyl peptidase IV converts the chemokine LD78beta into a most efficient monocyte attractant and CCR1 agonist

Chemokines are proinflammatory cytokines that play a role in leukocyte migration and activation. Recent reports showed that RANTES (regulated on activation normal T-cell expressed and secreted chemokine), eotaxin, macrophage-derived chemokine (MDC), and stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF-1) are NH(2)-terminally truncated by the lymphocyte surface glycoprotein and protease CD26/Dipeptidyl Peptidase IV (CD26/DPP IV). Removal of the NH(2)-terminal dipeptide resulted in impaired inflammatory properties of RANTES, eotaxin, MDC, and SDF-1. The potential CD26/DPP IV substrate macrophage inflammatory protein-1beta (MIP-1beta) and the related chemokine, LD78alpha (ie, one of the MIP-1alpha isoforms), were not affected by this protease. However, CD26/DPP IV cleaved LD78beta, a most potent CCR5 binding chemokine and inhibitor of macrophage tropic human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) Infection, into LD78beta(3-70). Naturally truncated LD78beta(3-70), but not truncated MIP-1beta, was recovered as an abundant chemokine form from peripheral blood mononuclear cells. In contrast to all other chemokines processed by CD26/DPP IV, LD78beta(3-70) had increased chemotactic activity in comparison to intact LD78beta. With a minimal effective concentration of 30 pmol/L, LD78beta(3-70) became the most efficient monocyte chemoattractant. LD78beta(3-70) retained its high capacity to induce an intracellular calcium increase in CCR5-transfected cells. Moreover, on CCR1 transfectants, truncated LD78beta(3-70) was 30-fold more potent than intact LD78beta. Thus, CD26/DPP IV can exert not only a negative but also a positive feedback during inflammation by increasing the specific activity of LD78beta. CD26/DPP IV-cleaved LD78beta(3-70) is the most potent CCR1 and CCR5 agonist that retains strong anti-HIV-1 activity, indicating the importance of the chemokine-protease interaction in normal and pathologic conditions. (Blood. 2000;96:1674-1680)