Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) latency represents the major barrier to virus eradication in infected individuals because cells harboring latent HIV-1 provirus are not affected by current antiretroviral therapy (ART). We previously demonstrated that DNA methylation of HIV-1 long terminal repeat (5’ LTR) restricts HIV-1 reactivation and, together with chromatin conformation, represents an important mechanism of HIV-1 latency maintenance. Here, we explored the new issue of temporal development of DNA methylation in latent HIV-1 5’ LTR. In the Jurkat CD4+ T cell model of latency, we showed that the stimulation of host cells contributed to de novo DNA methylation of the latent HIV-1 5’ LTR sequences. Consecutive stimulations of model CD4+ T cell line with TNF-α and PMA or with SAHA contributed to the progressive accumulation of 5’ LTR DNA methylation. Further, we showed that once established, the high DNA methylation level of the latent 5’ LTR in the cell line model was a stable epigenetic mark. Finally, we explored the development of 5’ LTR DNA methylation in the latent reservoir of HIV-1-infected individuals who were treated with ART. We detected low levels of 5’ LTR DNA methylation in the resting CD4+ T cells of the group of patients who were treated for up to 3 years. However, after long-term ART, we observed an accumulation of 5’ LTR DNA methylation in the latent reservoir. Importantly, within the latent reservoir of some long-term-treated individuals, we uncovered populations of proviral molecules with a high density of 5’ LTR CpG methylation. Our data showed the presence of 5’ LTR DNA methylation in the long-term reservoir of HIV-1-infected individuals and implied that the transient stimulation of cells harboring latent proviruses may contribute, at least in part, to the methylation of the HIV-1 promoter.

Germ cell tumors and particularly seminomas reflect the epigenomic features of their parental primordial germ cells (PGCs), including genomic DNA hypomethylation and expression of pluripotent cell markers. Because the DNA hypomethylation might be a result of TET dioxygenase activity, we examined expression of TET1‐3 enzymes and the level of their product, 5‐hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC), in a panel of histologically characterized seminomas and non‐seminomatous germ cell tumors. Expression of TET dioxygenase mRNAs was quantified by real‐time PCR. TET1 expression and the level of 5hmC were examined immunohistochemically. Quantitative assessment of 5‐methylcytosine (5mC) and 5hmC levels was done by the liquid chromatography‐mass spectroscopy technique. We found highly increased expression of TET1 dioxygenase in most seminomas and strong TET1 staining in seminoma cells. Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 mutations were not detected, suggesting the enzymatic activity of TET1. The levels of 5mC and 5hmC in seminomas were found decreased in comparison to non‐seminomatous germ cell tumors and healthy testicular tissue. We propose that TET1 expression should be studied as a potential marker of seminomas and mixed germ cell tumors and we suggest that elevated expression of TET dioxygenase enzymes is associated with the maintenance of low DNA methylation levels in seminomas. This “anti‐methylator” phenotype of seminomas is in contrast to the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) observed in a fraction of tumors of various types.