Poxvirus Complement Control Proteins Are Expressed on the Cell Surface through an Intermolecular Disulfide Bridge with the Viral A56 Protein

The vaccinia virus (VACV) complement control protein (VCP) is an immunomodulatory protein that is both secreted from and expressed on the surface of infected cells. Surface expression of VCP occurs though an interaction with the viral transmembrane protein A56 and is dependent on a free N-terminal cysteine of VCP. Although A56 and VCP have been shown to interact in infected cells, the mechanism remains unclear. To investigate if A56 is sufficient for surface expression, we transiently expressed VCP and A56 in eukaryotic cell lines and found that they interact on the cell surface in the absence of other viral proteins. Since A56 contains three extracellular cysteines, we hypothesized that one of the cysteines may be unpaired and could therefore form a disulfide bridge with VCP. To test this, we generated a series of A56 mutants in which each cysteine was mutated to a serine, and we found that mutation of cysteine 162 abrogated VCP cell surface expression. We also tested the ability of other poxvirus complement control proteins to bind to VACV A56. While the smallpox homolog of VCP is able to bind VACV A56, the ectromelia virus (ECTV) VCP homolog is only able to bind the ECTV homolog of A56, indicating that these proteins may have coevolved. Surface expression of poxvirus complement control proteins may have important implications in viral pathogenesis, as a virus that does not express cell surface VCP is attenuated in vivo. This suggests that surface expression of VCP may contribute to poxvirus pathogenesis.Poxviruses, including vaccinia virus (VACV), encode large numbers of immunomodulatory proteins that help them establish an infection and combat the host''s immune response (10, 32). One of these is the vaccinia virus complement control protein (VCP), which is both secreted from and expressed on the surface of infected cells (9, 14, 16, 17). VCP acts against the complement system, a series of soluble proteins that is an important early component of the innate immune system and also shapes adaptive immune responses (15, 42, 43). In response to viral infection, complement can opsonize or inactivate virions and can lyse enveloped virus or infected cells (1, 3, 7, 12). Because of these pressures, a number of viruses, including herpes simplex virus, flaviviruses, and poxviruses, encode novel or host-derived regulators of complement, while others, including HIV and poxviruses, incorporate host complement regulatory proteins into virus particles (7, 11, 31, 39). Many orthopoxviruses encode a complement regulator (8, 20, 23, 29), and the most studied of these is VCP. Structurally, VCP is made up of four short consensus repeats (SCR) that are the basic units of mammalian complement regulators (17, 25), and VCP has been shown to interfere with the complement cascade at multiple steps (2, 16, 20-22, 25, 28-30, 33). Additionally, a VCP knockout virus generates smaller lesions in animal models (14, 16). While some host complement control proteins (CCPs) are secreted, many contain transmembrane domains (or a glycophosphatidylinositol anchor) and are thus expressed on the cell surface (42, 43). Thus, when we found that VCP is also expressed on the infected cell surface and protects infected cells from complement-mediated lysis in vitro (9), we believed this to be an important interaction that required further investigation. We previously found that the N-terminal cysteine on VCP was needed for surface expression and that the VACV transmembrane protein A56 was also required (9). The vaccinia virus A56 protein is a type 1 transmembrane glycoprotein that is found on the surface of infected cells and on extracellular virus particles (4, 18, 26, 27, 36). It interacts with another viral protein, K2 (19, 37, 45), which lacks a transmembrane domain and binds to A56 noncovalently (36). The A56/K2 complex prevents syncytium formation between infected cells and superinfection by interacting with the vaccinia virus entry/fusion complex on virions (24, 38, 40, 41). Here we provide evidence that the N-terminal cysteine on VCP forms an intermolecular disulfide bond with cysteine 162 on the ectodomain of A56. We also demonstrate that similar interactions can occur with other poxvirus CCPs, as the smallpox virus and ectromelia virus homologs of VCP also exhibit A56-dependent surface expression.     

Disulfide Bond Formation at the C Termini of Vaccinia Virus A26 and A27 Proteins Does Not Require Viral Redox Enzymes and Suppresses Glycosaminoglycan-Mediated Cell Fusion

Vaccinia virus A26 protein is an envelope protein of the intracellular mature virus (IMV) of vaccinia virus. A mutant A26 protein with a truncation of the 74 C-terminal amino acids was expressed in infected cells but failed to be incorporated into IMV (W. L. Chiu, C. L. Lin, M. H. Yang, D. L. Tzou, and W. Chang, J. Virol 81:2149-2157, 2007). Here, we demonstrate that A27 protein formed a protein complex with the full-length form but not with the truncated form of A26 protein in infected cells as well as in IMV. The formation of the A26-A27 protein complex occurred prior to virion assembly and did not require another A27-binding protein, A17 protein, in the infected cells. A26 protein contains six cysteine residues, and in vitro mutagenesis showed that Cys441 and Cys442 mediated intermolecular disulfide bonds with Cys71 and Cys72 of viral A27 protein, whereas Cys43 and Cys342 mediated intramolecular disulfide bonds. A26 and A27 proteins formed disulfide-linked complexes in transfected 293T cells, showing that the intermolecular disulfide bond formation did not depend on viral redox pathways. Finally, using cell fusion from within and fusion from without, we demonstrate that cell surface glycosaminoglycan is important for virus-cell fusion and that A26 protein, by forming complexes with A27 protein, partially suppresses fusion.Vaccinia virus, the prototype of the Orthopoxvirus genus of the family Poxviridae, infects many cell lines and animals (13) and produces several forms of infectious particles, among which the intracellular mature virus (IMV) is the most abundant form inside cells. The IMV can be wrapped with additional Golgi membrane, transported through microtubules, and released from cells as extracellular enveloped viruses (10). The IMV has evolved to enter host cells through plasma membrane fusion (1, 3, 12, 29, 47) or endocytosis (11, 48). Recently, Mercer et al. reported that IMV entered HeLa cells through apoptotic mimicry and macropinocytosis (32), and Huang et al. reported that IMV enters into HeLa cells through a dynamin-dependent fluid-phase endocytosis that required the cellular protein VPEF (22).The IMV contains more than 75 viral proteins. Of these, more than 10 viral envelope proteins are known to be involved in vaccinia virus entry into cells (6, 34, 55). Vaccinia virus contains at least five attachment proteins, with H3, A27, and D8 binding to cell surface glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) (7, 21, 28), A26 protein binding to the extracellular matrix protein laminin (5), and L1 protein binding to unidentified cell surface molecules (14). A27 protein also binds to the viral A17 protein through its C-terminal region (35, 50), and it was recently shown that the coexpression of A17 and A27 proteins resulted in cell fusion in transiently transfected 293T cells (27). In this study, we demonstrate the formation through disulfide bonds of complexes between two viral attachment proteins, A26 and A27, and we determine the cysteine residues that are critical for these disulfide bonds. We also address the biological role of the A26-A27 protein complex formation in cell fusion regulation.     

Heavily Isotype-Dependent Protective Activities of Human Antibodies against Vaccinia Virus Extracellular Virion Antigen B5

Antibodies against the extracellular virion (EV or EEV) form of vaccinia virus are an important component of protective immunity in animal models and likely contribute to the protection of immunized humans against poxviruses. Using fully human monoclonal antibodies (MAbs), we now have shown that the protective attributes of the human anti-B5 antibody response to the smallpox vaccine (vaccinia virus) are heavily dependent on effector functions. By switching Fc domains of a single MAb, we have definitively shown that neutralization in vitro—and protection in vivo in a mouse model—by the human anti-B5 immunoglobulin G MAbs is isotype dependent, thereby demonstrating that efficient protection by these antibodies is not simply dependent on binding an appropriate vaccinia virion antigen with high affinity but in fact requires antibody effector function. The complement components C3 and C1q, but not C5, were required for neutralization. We also have demonstrated that human MAbs against B5 can potently direct complement-dependent cytotoxicity of vaccinia virus-infected cells. Each of these results was then extended to the polyclonal human antibody response to the smallpox vaccine. A model is proposed to explain the mechanism of EV neutralization. Altogether these findings enhance our understanding of the central protective activities of smallpox vaccine-elicited antibodies in immunized humans.The smallpox vaccine, live vaccinia virus (VACV), is frequently considered the gold standard of human vaccines and has been enormously effective in preventing smallpox disease. The smallpox vaccine led to the worldwide eradication of the disease via massive vaccination campaigns in the 1960s and 1970s, one of the greatest successes of modern medicine (30). However, despite the efficacy of the smallpox vaccine, the mechanisms of protection remain unclear. Understanding those mechanisms is key for developing immunologically sound vaccinology principles that can be applied to the design of future vaccines for other infectious diseases (3, 101).Clinical studies of fatal human cases of smallpox disease (variola virus infection) have shown that neutralizing antibody titers were either low or absent in patient serum (24, 68). In contrast, neutralizing antibody titers for the VACV intracellular mature virion (MV or IMV) were correlated with protection of vaccinees against smallpox (68). VACV immune globulin (VIG) (human polyclonal antibodies) is a promising treatment against smallpox (47), since it was able to reduce the number of smallpox cases ∼80% among variola-exposed individuals in four case-controlled clinical studies (43, 47, 52, 53, 69). In animal studies, neutralizing antibodies are crucial for protecting primates and mice against pathogenic poxviruses (3, 7, 17, 21, 27, 35, 61, 66, 85).The specificities and the functions of protective antipoxvirus antibodies have been areas of intensive research, and the mechanics of poxvirus neutralization have been debated for years. There are several interesting features and problems associated with the antibody response to variola virus and related poxviruses, including the large size of the viral particles and the various abundances of many distinct surface proteins (18, 75, 91, 93). Furthermore, poxviruses have two distinct virion forms, intracellular MV and extracellular enveloped virions (EV or EEV), each with a unique biology. Most importantly, MV and EV virions share no surface proteins (18, 93), and therefore, there is no single neutralizing antibody that can neutralize both virion forms. As such, an understanding of virion structure is required to develop knowledge regarding the targets of protective antibodies.Neutralizing antibodies confer protection mainly through the recognition of antigens on the surface of a virus. A number of groups have discovered neutralizing antibody targets of poxviruses in animals and humans (3). The relative roles of antibodies against MV and EV in protective immunity still remain somewhat unclear. There are compelling data that antibodies against MV (21, 35, 39, 66, 85, 90, 91) or EV (7, 16, 17, 36, 66, 91) are sufficient for protection, and a combination of antibodies against both targets is most protective (66). It remains controversial whether antibodies to one virion form are more important than those to the other (3, 61, 66). The most abundant viral particles are MV, which accumulate in infected cells and are released as cells die (75). Neutralization of MV is relatively well characterized (3, 8, 21, 35). EV, while less abundant, are critical for viral spread and virulence in vivo (93, 108). Neutralization of EV has remained more enigmatic (3).B5R (also known as B5 or WR187), one of five known EV-specific proteins, is highly conserved among different strains of VACV and in other orthopoxviruses (28, 49). B5 was identified as a protective antigen by Galmiche et al., and the available evidence indicated that the protection was mediated by anti-B5 antibodies (36). Since then, a series of studies have examined B5 as a potential recombinant vaccine antigen or as a target of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) (1, 2, 7, 17, 40, 46, 66, 91, 110). It is known that humans immunized with the smallpox vaccine make antibodies against B5 (5, 22, 62, 82). It is also known that animals receiving the smallpox vaccine generate antibodies against B5 (7, 20, 27, 70). Furthermore, previous neutralization assays have indicated that antibodies generated against B5 are primarily responsible for neutralization of VACV EV (5, 83). Recently Chen at al. generated chimpanzee-human fusion MAbs against B5 and showed that the MAbs can protect mice from lethal challenge with virulent VACV (17). We recently reported, in connection with a study using murine monoclonal antibodies, that neutralization of EV is highly complement dependent and the ability of anti-B5 MAbs to protect in vivo correlated with their ability to neutralize EV in a complement-dependent manner (7).The focus of the study described here was to elucidate the mechanisms of EV neutralization, focusing on the human antibody response to B5. Our overall goal is to understand underlying immunobiological and virological parameters that determine the emergence of protective antiviral immune responses in humans.     

The Paramyxoviruses Simian Virus 5 and Mumps Virus Recruit Host Cell CD46 To Evade Complement-Mediated Neutralization

The complement system is a critical component of the innate immune response that all animal viruses must face during natural infections. Our previous results have shown that treatment of the paramyxovirus simian virus 5 (SV5) with human serum results in deposition of complement C3-derived polypeptides on virion particles. Here, we show that the virion-associated C3 component includes the inactive form iC3b, suggesting that SV5 may have mechanisms to evade the host complement system. Electron microscopy, gradient centrifugation, and Western blot analysis indicated that purified SV5 virions derived from human A549 cells contained CD46, a plasma membrane-expressed regulator of complement that acts as a cofactor for cleavage and inactivation of C3b into iC3b. In vitro cleavage assays with purified complement components showed that SV5 virions had C3b cofactor activity, resulting in specific factor I-mediated cleavage of C3b into inactive iC3b. SV5 particles generated in CHO cells, which do not express CD46, did not have cofactor activity. Conversely, virions derived from a CHO cell line that was engineered to overexpress human CD46 contained elevated levels of virion-associated CD46 and displayed enhanced C3b cofactor activity. In comparison with C3b, purified SV5 virions had very low cofactor activity against C4b, consistent with the known preference of CD46 for C3b versus C4b. Similar results were obtained for the closely related mumps virus (MuV), except that MuV particles derived from CHO-CD46 cells had higher C4b cofactor activity than SV5 virions. In neutralization assays with human serum, SV5 and MuV containing CD46 showed slower kinetics and more resistance to neutralization than SV5 and MuV that lacked CD46. Our results support a model in which the rubulaviruses SV5 and MuV incorporate cell surface complement inhibitors into progeny virions as a mechanism to limit complement-mediated neutralization.The complement system constitutes a complex group of both soluble and cell-associated proteins that together form an integral part of the innate host defense against pathogens (reviewed in references 7, 9, 11, and 31). Complement can serve to link innate and adaptive immunity through a large number of activities, including recognition of viruses, direct neutralization of infectivity, recruitment and stimulation of leukocytes, opsonization by immune cells, and activation of T- and B-cell responses (9, 11, 27). Complement activation and the ability of viruses to counteract complement can play important roles in viral pathogenesis, as well as the design of more effective vaccines and therapeutic vectors (6, 9, 17, 36, 43). The overall goal of the work described here was to determine the mechanism by which the paramyxoviruses simian virus 5 (SV5) and mumps virus (MuV) limit activation of complement pathways.The complement cascade can be initiated through three main pathways: the classical pathway, the lectin pathway, and the alternative pathway (11, 40). These three pathways converge on a central component, C3, which is activated by cleavage into C3a and C3b. C3a serves as an anaphylatoxin to promote inflammation. C3b can bind covalently to viral components to aid in opsonization and phagocytosis. In addition, C3b can associate with other factors, such as factor B, to form the C3 convertase (e.g., C3bBb), and this functions to amplify the initially deposited C3b signal by further cleavage of C3 molecules in a feedback loop. Likewise, C4 can be activated by cleavage into the anaphylatoxin C4a and the C4b fragment, which links the classical and lectin pathways with the alternative pathway. The association of C3b with components further downstream, such as C6 through C9, can lead to formation of the membrane attack complex, which is capable of lysing virus particles or infected cells (reviewed in references 7, 11, and 28).The complement system needs to be highly regulated to prevent inappropriate activation and potential damage to normal cells and healthy tissues (3). Self-regulation of complement pathways involves the highly concerted actions of a family of soluble and cell-associated proteins called regulators of complement activation (RCA). RCA proteins can limit inappropriate complement activation through two major mechanisms: (i) by accelerating the disassociation of C3 or C5 convertase or (ii) by acting as a cofactor to promote proteolytic cleavage of C3b or C4b by the complement protease factor I. Examples of RCA proteins are factor H, CD46, complement receptor 1 (CR1, or CD35), and C4 binding protein (14, 19, 24, 45).CD46, or membrane cofactor protein, is an integral membrane RCA protein that is expressed on a wide range of tissues and cell types (32). CD46 is an N- and O-linked glycosylated protein expressed at the plasma membrane as multiple isoforms that are derived from alternative splicing (32, 33, 39, 41). CD46 selectively binds to both C3b and C4b on cell surfaces, where it acts as a cofactor to promote efficient cleavage by complement protease factor I (44; reviewed in references 5 and 32). For C3b, CD46 and factor I combine to mediate inactivation to iC3b, and this is a major mechanism for limiting the amplification of low basal levels of C3b that arise from spontaneous alternative-pathway activation. CD46 also serves as a cofactor for factor I-mediated cleavage of C4b into C4c and C4d, but this cofactor activity is less efficient than that seen for C3b cleavage (35, 45).Viruses have evolved a number of mechanisms to inhibit or to delay the neutralizing effects of complement (9, 16). Large DNA viruses have coding capacities that allow them to encode a variety of mimics of host cell RCA proteins, and these viral homologs often function to inactivate complement components by supplying cofactor activity or by accelerating the decay of convertases (reviewed in references 2, 7, 29, and 31). For example, herpesvirus saimiri expresses a complement control protein that inhibits the C3 convertase (20). As an alternative mechanism to counteract complement, a number of enveloped DNA viruses and retroviruses have been shown to recruit cell-associated RCA proteins into budding particles (15, 47, 48). Examples of this are vaccinia virus and human immunodeficiency virus type 1, which incorporate CD55, CD59, and CD46 into progeny virions (16, 42, 48).In contrast to retroviruses and large DNA viruses, mechanisms that are employed to limit or evade host cell complement pathways have not been described for the paramyxovirus family of negative-strand RNA viruses (30). It has been known for many years that complement is an important factor in paramyxovirus neutralization (18, 23, 34, 49, 50). For example, the closely related paramyxoviruses SV5 and MuV preferentially activate the complement alternative pathway in vitro, and this activation can contribute to the efficiency of neutralization by human serum (23, 26). These findings raised the question of whether negative-strand RNA viruses have mechanisms to limit activation and/or amplification of the complement cascade.We have previously shown that treatment of SV5 and MuV particles with normal human serum led to deposition of C3-derived components on virions, but the virion-associated C3 molecules had properties of the inactive form, iC3b, and not the intact C3b (26). In this study, we tested the hypothesis that SV5 and MuV incorporate host cell RCA proteins into budding virions as a mechanism to limit complement activity through inactivation of C3b. CD46 was found associated with purified SV5 and MuV virions that were derived from cells expressing CD46, and these particles displayed C3b cofactor activity in vitro. Consistent with this inactivation of C3b, CD46-containing virus was more resistant to in vitro neutralization by human serum than virus derived from CD46-deficient cells. Our results support a model in which these closely related paramyxoviruses incorporate at least one cell surface RCA protein into progeny virions as a mechanism to evade complement-mediated neutralization.     

Acquisition of Complement Resistance through Incorporation of CD55/Decay-Accelerating Factor into Viral Particles Bearing Baculovirus GP64

A major obstacle to gene transduction by viral vectors is inactivation by human complement in vivo. One way to overcome this is to incorporate complement regulatory proteins, such as CD55/decay accelerating factor (DAF), into viral particles. Lentivirus vectors pseudotyped with the baculovirus envelope protein GP64 have been shown to acquire more potent resistance to serum inactivation and longer transgene expression than those pseudotyped with the vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) envelope protein G. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying resistance to serum inactivation in pseudotype particles bearing the GP64 have not been precisely elucidated. In this study, we generated pseudotype and recombinant VSVs bearing the GP64. Recombinant VSVs generated in human cell lines exhibited the incorporation of human DAF in viral particles and were resistant to serum inactivation, whereas those generated in insect cells exhibited no incorporation of human DAF and were sensitive to complement inactivation. The GP64 and human DAF were detected on the detergent-resistant membrane and were coprecipitated by immunoprecipitation analysis. A pseudotype VSV bearing GP64 produced in human DAF knockdown cells reduced resistance to serum inactivation. In contrast, recombinant baculoviruses generated in insect cells expressing human DAF or carrying the human DAF gene exhibited resistance to complement inactivation. These results suggest that the incorporation of human DAF into viral particles by interacting with baculovirus GP64 is involved in the acquisition of resistance to serum inactivation.Gene therapy is a potential treatment option for genetic diseases, malignant diseases, and other acquired diseases. To this end, safe and efficient gene transfer into specific target cells is a central requirement, and a variety of nonviral and viral vector systems have been developed (6, 44). Recombinant viruses can be used for efficient gene transfer. Retroviruses, adeno-associated viruses, and lentiviruses are able to integrate foreign genes into host genomes and are suitable for gene therapeutics by virtue of their permanent expression of the therapeutic genes, whereas adenoviruses, herpesviruses, and baculoviruses can transiently express foreign genes (6, 12, 44). Pseudotype particles bearing other viral envelope proteins have been developed to improve transduction efficiency and the safety of viral vectors, including retrovirus (4, 7), lentivirus (25), vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (29), and baculovirus (17, 42). Pseudotype retroviruses and lentiviruses bearing the baculovirus envelope protein GP64 of Autographa californica nucleopolyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) have been shown to exhibit efficient gene transduction into a wide variety of cells with a lower cytotoxicity compared to those bearing the VSV envelope protein G (VSVG), which is commonly used for pseudotyping (18, 32, 35, 36).However, a drawback of gene transduction by viral vectors is that human sera inactivate the vectors (11, 40). Complement is a major element of the innate immune response and serves to link innate and adaptive immunity (8). Complement activation can occur via classical, lectin, and alternative pathways (2, 8). All pathways invoke several responses, such as virus opsonization, virolysis, anaphylatoxin, and chemotaxin production, as well as others (2, 8). VSV and baculovirus are inactivated by human sera via the classical pathway (1, 11). Because complement activation also induces potential damage to host cells, the complement system is tightly regulated by the complement regulatory proteins (CRPs), including CD55/decay-accelerating factor (DAF), CD46/membrane cofactor protein (MCP), and CD59 (2, 8, 15). DAF and CD46 inhibit activation of C3/C5-converting enzymes, which regulate the activation of classical and alternative pathways, whereas CD59 regulates the assembly of the membrane attack complex (2, 8, 15).Viral vectors can be manipulated to confer resistance to the complement inactivation. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is known to develop resistance to human complement through the incorporation of DAF, CD46, and CD59 to the viral particles (22, 30, 31, 38). Moloney murine leukemia virus vectors produced in HT1080 cells are resistant to complement inactivation (5). Baculovirus and lentivirus vectors bearing DAF or the fusion protein between the functional domains of human DAF and the GP64 were resistant to complement inactivation (9, 13). It has been shown that lentivirus vectors pseudotyped with the GP64 are more resistant to inactivation in the sera of mice and rats (14, 32) and are capable of executing longer expression of the transgenes in nasal epithelia compared to those pseudotyped with the VSVG (35, 36). However, the precise mechanisms underlying the resistance to complement inactivation by pseudotyping of the GP64 is not known.To clarify the molecular mechanisms underlying the resistance of the viral vectors pseudotyped with the GP64 to the complement inactivation, we produced pseudotype and recombinant VSVs bearing the GP64. The recombinant VSVs carrying the gp64 gene generated in human cells but not in insect cells exhibited incorporation of human DAF on the viral particles and were resistant to the complement inactivation. Furthermore, production of the gp64 pseudotype VSV in the DAF knockdown human cells impaired serum resistance, whereas production of the gp64 recombinant VSV in the CHO cell lines stably expressing human DAF and the recombinant baculoviruses in the insect cells stably expressing human DAF or encoding the DAF gene in the genome conferred resistance to the complement inactivation. These results suggest that DAF incorporation into viral particles bearing baculovirus GP64 confers resistance to serum inactivation.     

Pathogenic Hantaviruses Andes Virus and Hantaan Virus Induce Adherens Junction Disassembly by Directing Vascular Endothelial Cadherin Internalization in Human Endothelial Cells

Hantaviruses infect endothelial cells and cause 2 vascular permeability-based diseases. Pathogenic hantaviruses enhance the permeability of endothelial cells in response to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). However, the mechanism by which hantaviruses hyperpermeabilize endothelial cells has not been defined. The paracellular permeability of endothelial cells is uniquely determined by the homophilic assembly of vascular endothelial cadherin (VE-cadherin) within adherens junctions, which is regulated by VEGF receptor-2 (VEGFR2) responses. Here, we investigated VEGFR2 phosphorylation and the internalization of VE-cadherin within endothelial cells infected by pathogenic Andes virus (ANDV) and Hantaan virus (HTNV) and nonpathogenic Tula virus (TULV) hantaviruses. We found that VEGF addition to ANDV- and HTNV-infected endothelial cells results in the hyperphosphorylation of VEGFR2, while TULV infection failed to increase VEGFR2 phosphorylation. Concomitant with the VEGFR2 hyperphosphorylation, VE-cadherin was internalized to intracellular vesicles within ANDV- or HTNV-, but not TULV-, infected endothelial cells. Addition of angiopoietin-1 (Ang-1) or sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) to ANDV- or HTNV-infected cells blocked VE-cadherin internalization in response to VEGF. These findings are consistent with the ability of Ang-1 and S1P to inhibit hantavirus-induced endothelial cell permeability. Our results suggest that pathogenic hantaviruses disrupt fluid barrier properties of endothelial cell adherens junctions by enhancing VEGFR2-VE-cadherin pathway responses which increase paracellular permeability. These results provide a pathway-specific mechanism for the enhanced permeability of hantavirus-infected endothelial cells and suggest that stabilizing VE-cadherin within adherens junctions is a primary target for regulating endothelial cell permeability during pathogenic hantavirus infection.Hantaviruses cause 2 human diseases: hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS) and hantavirus pulmonary syndrome (HPS) (50). HPS and HFRS are multifactorial in nature and cause thrombocytopenia, immune and endothelial cell responses, and hypoxia, which contribute to disease (7, 11, 31, 42, 62). Although these syndromes sound quite different, they share common components which involve the ability of hantaviruses to infect endothelial cells and induce capillary permeability. Edema, which results from capillary leakage of fluid into tissues and organs, is a common finding in both HPS and HFRS patients (4, 7, 11, 31, 42, 62). In fact, both diseases can present with renal or pulmonary sequelae, and the renal or pulmonary focus of hantavirus diseases is likely to result from hantavirus infection of endothelial cells within vast glomerular and pulmonary capillary beds (4, 7, 11, 31, 42, 62). All hantaviruses predominantly infect endothelial cells which line capillaries (31, 42, 44, 61, 62), and endothelial cells have a primary role in maintaining fluid barrier functions of the vasculature (1, 12, 55). Although hantaviruses do not lyse endothelial cells (44, 61), this primary cellular target underlies hantavirus-induced changes in capillary integrity. As a result, understanding altered endothelial cell responses following hantavirus infection is fundamental to defining the mechanism of permeability induced by pathogenic hantaviruses (1, 12, 55).Pathogenic, but not nonpathogenic, hantaviruses use β₃ integrins on the surface of endothelial cells and platelets for attachment (19, 21, 23, 39, 46), and β₃ integrins play prominent roles in regulating vascular integrity (3, 6, 8, 24, 48). Pathogenic hantaviruses bind to basal, inactive conformations of β₃ integrins (35, 46, 53) and days after infection inhibit β₃ integrin-directed endothelial cell migration (20, 46). This may be the result of cell-associated virus (19, 20, 22) which keeps β₃ in an inactive state but could also occur through additional regulatory processes that have yet to be defined. Interestingly, the nonpathogenic hantaviruses Prospect Hill virus (PHV) and Tula virus (TULV) fail to alter β₃ integrin functions, and their entry is consistent with the use of discrete α₅β₁ integrins (21, 23, 36).On endothelial cells, α_vβ₃ integrins normally regulate permeabilizing effects of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (VEGFR2) (3, 24, 48, 51). VEGF was initially identified as an edema-causing vascular permeability factor (VPF) that is 50,000 times more potent than histamine in directing fluid across capillaries (12, 14). VEGF is responsible for disassembling adherens junctions between endothelial cells to permit cellular movement, wound repair, and angiogenesis (8, 10, 12, 13, 17, 26, 57). Extracellular domains of β₃ integrins and VEGFR2 reportedly form a coprecipitable complex (3), and knocking out β₃ causes capillary permeability that is augmented by VEGF addition (24, 47, 48). Pathogenic hantaviruses inhibit β₃ integrin functions days after infection and similarly enhance the permeability of endothelial cells in response to VEGF (22).Adherens junctions form the primary fluid barrier of endothelial cells, and VEGFR2 responses control adherens junction disassembly (10, 17, 34, 57, 63). Vascular endothelial cadherin (VE-cadherin) is an endothelial cell-specific adherens junction protein and the primary determinant of paracellular permeability within the vascular endothelium (30, 33, 34). Activation of VEGFR2, another endothelial cell-specific protein, triggers signaling responses resulting in VE-cadherin disassembly and endocytosis, which increases the permeability of endothelial cell junctions (10, 12, 17, 34). VEGF is induced by hypoxic conditions and released by endothelial cells, platelets, and immune cells (2, 15, 38, 52). VEGF acts locally on endothelial cells through the autocrine or paracrine activation of VEGFR2, and the disassembly of endothelial cell adherens junctions increases the availability of nutrients to tissues and facilitates leukocyte trafficking and diapedesis (10, 12, 17, 55). The importance of endothelial cell barrier integrity is often in conflict with requirements for endothelial cells to move in order to permit angiogenesis and repair or cell and fluid egress, and as a result, VEGF-induced VE-cadherin responses are tightly controlled (10, 17, 18, 32, 33, 59). This limits capillary permeability while dynamically responding to a variety of endothelial cell-specific factors and conditions. However, if unregulated, this process can result in localized capillary permeability and edema (2, 9, 10, 12, 14, 17, 29, 60).Interestingly, tissue edema and hypoxia are common findings in both HPS and HFRS patients (11, 31, 62), and the ability of pathogenic hantaviruses to infect human endothelial cells provides a means for hantaviruses to directly alter normal VEGF-VE-cadherin regulation. In fact, the permeability of endothelial cells infected by pathogenic Andes virus (ANDV) or Hantaan virus (HTNV) is dramatically enhanced in response to VEGF addition (22). This response is absent from endothelial cells comparably infected with the nonpathogenic TULV and suggests that enhanced VEGF-induced endothelial cell permeability is a common underlying response of both HPS- and HFRS-causing hantaviruses (22). In these studies, we comparatively investigate responses of human endothelial cells infected with pathogenic ANDV and HTNV, as well as nonpathogenic TULV.     

Virus Entry via the Alternative Coreceptors CCR3 and FPRL1 Differs by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Subtype

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infects target cells by binding to CD4 and a chemokine receptor, most commonly CCR5. CXCR4 is a frequent alternative coreceptor (CoR) in subtype B and D HIV-1 infection, but the importance of many other alternative CoRs remains elusive. We have analyzed HIV-1 envelope (Env) proteins from 66 individuals infected with the major subtypes of HIV-1 to determine if virus entry into highly permissive NP-2 cell lines expressing most known alternative CoRs differed by HIV-1 subtype. We also performed linear regression analysis to determine if virus entry via the major CoR CCR5 correlated with use of any alternative CoR and if this correlation differed by subtype. Virus pseudotyped with subtype B Env showed robust entry via CCR3 that was highly correlated with CCR5 entry efficiency. By contrast, viruses pseudotyped with subtype A and C Env proteins were able to use the recently described alternative CoR FPRL1 more efficiently than CCR3, and use of FPRL1 was correlated with CCR5 entry. Subtype D Env was unable to use either CCR3 or FPRL1 efficiently, a unique pattern of alternative CoR use. These results suggest that each subtype of circulating HIV-1 may be subject to somewhat different selective pressures for Env-mediated entry into target cells and suggest that CCR3 may be used as a surrogate CoR by subtype B while FPRL1 may be used as a surrogate CoR by subtypes A and C. These data may provide insight into development of resistance to CCR5-targeted entry inhibitors and alternative entry pathways for each HIV-1 subtype.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infects target cells by binding first to CD4 and then to a coreceptor (CoR), of which C-C chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) is the most common (6, 53). CXCR4 is an additional CoR for up to 50% of subtype B and D HIV-1 isolates at very late stages of disease (4, 7, 28, 35). Many other seven-membrane-spanning G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been identified as alternative CoRs when expressed on various target cell lines in vitro, including CCR1 (76, 79), CCR2b (24), CCR3 (3, 5, 17, 32, 60), CCR8 (18, 34, 38), GPR1 (27, 65), GPR15/BOB (22), CXCR5 (39), CXCR6/Bonzo/STRL33/TYMSTR (9, 22, 25, 45, 46), APJ (26), CMKLR1/ChemR23 (49, 62), FPLR1 (67, 68), RDC1 (66), and D6 (55). HIV-2 and simian immunodeficiency virus SIVmac isolates more frequently show expanded use of these alternative CoRs than HIV-1 isolates (12, 30, 51, 74), and evidence that alternative CoRs other than CXCR4 mediate infection of primary target cells by HIV-1 isolates is sparse (18, 30, 53, 81). Genetic deficiency in CCR5 expression is highly protective against HIV-1 transmission (21, 36), establishing CCR5 as the primary CoR. The importance of alternative CoRs other than CXCR4 has remained elusive despite many studies (1, 30, 70, 81). Expansion of CoR use from CCR5 to include CXCR4 is frequently associated with the ability to use additional alternative CoRs for viral entry (8, 16, 20, 63, 79) in most but not all studies (29, 33, 40, 77, 78). This finding suggests that the sequence changes in HIV-1 env required for use of CXCR4 as an additional or alternative CoR (14, 15, 31, 37, 41, 57) are likely to increase the potential to use other alternative CoRs.We have used the highly permissive NP-2/CD4 human glioma cell line developed by Soda et al. (69) to classify virus entry via the alternative CoRs CCR1, CCR3, CCR8, GPR1, CXCR6, APJ, CMKLR1/ChemR23, FPRL1, and CXCR4. Full-length molecular clones of 66 env genes from most prevalent HIV-1 subtypes were used to generate infectious virus pseudotypes expressing a luciferase reporter construct (19, 57). Two types of analysis were performed: the level of virus entry mediated by each alternative CoR and linear regression of entry mediated by CCR5 versus all other alternative CoRs. We thus were able to identify patterns of alternative CoR use that were subtype specific and to determine if use of any alternative CoR was correlated or independent of CCR5-mediated entry. The results obtained have implications for the evolution of env function, and the analyses revealed important differences between subtype B Env function and all other HIV-1 subtypes.     

gp340 Promotes Transcytosis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 in Genital Tract-Derived Cell Lines and Primary Endocervical Tissue

The human scavenger receptor gp340 has been identified as a binding protein for the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) envelope that is expressed on the cell surface of female genital tract epithelial cells. This interaction allows such epithelial cells to efficiently transmit infective virus to susceptible targets and maintain viral infectivity for several days. Within the context of vaginal transmission, HIV must first traverse a normally protective mucosa containing a cell barrier to reach the underlying T cells and dendritic cells, which propagate and spread the infection. The mechanism by which HIV-1 can bypass an otherwise healthy cellular barrier remains an important area of study. Here, we demonstrate that genital tract-derived cell lines and primary human endocervical tissue can support direct transcytosis of cell-free virus from the apical to basolateral surfaces. Further, this transport of virus can be blocked through the addition of antibodies or peptides that directly block the interaction of gp340 with the HIV-1 envelope, if added prior to viral pulsing on the apical side of the cell or tissue barrier. Our data support a role for the previously described heparan sulfate moieties in mediating this transcytosis but add gp340 as an important facilitator of HIV-1 transcytosis across genital tract tissue. This study demonstrates that HIV-1 actively traverses the protective barriers of the human genital tract and presents a second mechanism whereby gp340 can promote heterosexual transmission.Through correlative studies with macaques challenged with simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV), the initial targets of infection in nontraumatic vaginal exposure to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) have been identified as subepithelial T cells and dendritic cells (DCs) (18, 23, 31, 36-38). While human transmission may differ from macaque transmission, the existing models of human transmission remain controversial. For the virus to successfully reach its CD4⁺ targets, HIV must first traverse the columnar mucosal epithelial cell barrier of the endocervix or uterus or the stratified squamous barrier of the vagina or ectocervix, whose normal functions include protection of underlying tissue from pathogens. This portion of the human innate immune defense system represents a significant impediment to transmission. Studies have placed the natural transmission rate of HIV per sexual act between 0.005 and 0.3% (17, 45). Breaks in the epithelial barrier caused by secondary infection with other sexual transmitted diseases or the normal physical trauma often associated with vaginal intercourse represent one potential means for viral exposure to submucosal cells and have been shown to significantly increase transmission (reviewed in reference 11). However, studies of nontraumatic exposure to SIV in macaques demonstrate that these disruptions are not necessary for successful transmission to healthy females. This disparity indicates that multiple mechanisms by which HIV-1 can pass through mucosal epithelium might exist in vivo. Identifying these mechanisms represents an important obstacle to understanding and ultimately preventing HIV transmission.Several host cellular receptors, including DC-specific intercellular adhesion molecule-grabbing integrin, galactosyl ceramide, mannose receptor, langerin, heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs), and chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans, have been identified that facilitate disease progression through binding of HIV virions without being required for fusion and infection (2, 3, 12, 14, 16, 25, 29, 30, 43, 46, 50). These host accessory proteins act predominately through glycosylation-based interactions between HIV envelope (Env) and the host cellular receptors. These different host accessory factors can lead to increased infectivity in cis and trans or can serve to concentrate and expose virus at sites relevant to furthering its spread within the body. The direct transcytosis of cell-free virus through primary genital epithelial cells and the human endometrial carcinoma cell line HEC1A has been described (7, 9); this is, in part, mediated by HSPGs (7). Within the HSPG family, the syndecans have been previously shown to facilitate trans infection of HIV in vitro through binding of a specific region of Env that is moderately conserved (7, 8). This report also demonstrates that while HSPGs mediate a portion of the viral transcytosis that occurs in these two cell types, a significant portion of the observed transport occurs through an HSPG-independent mechanism. Other host cell factors likely provide alternatives to HSPGs for HIV-1 to use in subverting the mucosal epithelial barrier.gp340 is a member of the scavenger receptor cysteine-rich (SRCR) family of innate immune receptors. Its numerous splice variants can be found as a secreted component of human saliva (34, 41, 42) and as a membrane-associated receptor in a large number of epithelial cell lineages (22, 32, 40). Its normal cellular function includes immune surveillance of bacteria (4-6, 44), interaction with influenza A virus (19, 20, 32, 51) and surfactant proteins in the lung (20, 22, 33), and facilitating epithelial cell regeneration at sites of cellular inflammation and damage (27, 32). The secreted form of gp340, salivary agglutinin (SAG), was identified as a component of saliva that inhibits HIV-1 transmission in the oral pharynx through a specific interaction with the viral envelope protein that serves to agglutinate the virus and target it for degradation (34, 35, 41). Interestingly, SAG was demonstrated to form a direct protein-protein interaction with HIV Env (53, 54). Later, a cell surface-associated variant of SAG called gp340 was characterized as a binding partner for HIV-1 in the female genital tract that could facilitate virus transmission to susceptible targets of infection (47) and as a macrophage-expressed enhancer of infection (10).     

Type I Interferon-Sensitive Recombinant Newcastle Disease Virus for Oncolytic Virotherapy

Newcastle disease virus (NDV), an avian paramyxovirus, is tumor selective and intrinsically oncolytic because of its potent ability to induce apoptosis. Several studies have demonstrated that NDV is selectively cytotoxic to tumor cells but not normal cells due to defects in the interferon (IFN) antiviral responses of tumor cells. Many naturally occurring strains of NDV have an intact IFN-antagonistic function and can still replicate in normal human cells. To avoid potential toxicity issues with NDV, especially in cancer patients with immunosuppression, safe NDV-oncolytic vectors are needed. We compared the cell killing abilities of (i) a recombinant NDV (rNDV) strain, Beaudette C, containing an IFN-antagonistic, wild-type V protein (rBC), (ii) an isogenic recombinant virus with a mutant V protein (rBC-Edit virus) that induces increased IFN in infected cells and whose replication is restricted in normal human cells, and (iii) a recombinant LaSota virus with a virulent F protein cleavage site that is as interferon sensitive as rBC-Edit virus (LaSota V.F. virus). Our results indicated that the tumor-selective replication of rNDV is determined by the differential regulation of IFN-α and downstream antiviral genes induced by IFN-α, especially through the IRF-7 pathway. In a nude mouse model of human fibrosarcoma, we show that the IFN-sensitive NDV variants are as effective as IFN-resistant rBC virus in clearing the tumor burden. In addition, mice treated with rNDV exhibited no signs of toxicity to the viruses. These findings indicate that augmentation of innate immune responses by NDV results in selective oncolysis and offer a novel and safe virotherapy platform.Several naturally occurring or engineered oncolytic viruses are emerging as novel tools for selective growth in and killing of a variety of tumor cells (1, 21, 34, 41). It has been consistently reported that during tumor evolution, diminished interferon (IFN) responsiveness coevolves as a frequent genetic defect (4, 31, 32, 41). Any defects in responsiveness to interferon will afford permissiveness of tumors for replication of oncolytic viruses by blunting the antiviral innate immune system. Thus, it was suggested that oncolytic viruses could be engineered to induce strong IFN response and/or to be defective in antagonizing the IFN signaling. This would result in virus replication in tumor cells with IFN defects but in reduced or crippled virus replication in normal cells, with the absence of toxicity (42). A variety of oncolytic viruses have been engineered to exploit tumor-specific genetic defects (3, 12, 24, 42, 46) and shown to be potent oncolytic agents.Newcastle disease virus (NDV), an avian paramyxovirus, is a promising broad-spectrum oncolytic agent (27, 29, 30, 37). Nonengineered, naturally occurring strains of NDV such as 73-T (6), MTH68 (7), PV701 (28, 35), and NDV-HUJ (11) have been successfully employed in several clinical studies for tumor regression. NDV is inherently oncolytic and tumor selective, sparing normal cells (9, 15, 37). The tumor selectivity of NDV is considered to be due to a defective IFN response in tumor cells (10, 23, 37). NDV is a strong inducer of type I IFN in many types of cells (18). In normal cells, a robust IFN-mediated antiviral response limits the replication of NDV (9, 23). This known sensitivity of NDV to cellular antiviral mechanisms affords a wide safety margin for its use in humans.Recent studies have indicated that improved therapeutic vectors of NDV could be engineered through reverse genetics for enhanced oncolytic efficacy from an increased anti-tumor response and interleukin 2 (IL-2) receptor-mediated targeting (5, 9, 44, 46). Therefore, we reasoned that recombinant NDVs (rNDVs) that are susceptible to cellular innate immune responses would be safer and more effective oncolytic agents. Even though NDV is an avian virus and induces a strong IFN response in normal human cells, it still expresses IFN-antagonizing activity. Ablation of the expression of V protein, which is responsible for this anti-IFN activity, may further reduce the ability of NDV to infect and kill normal human cells without affecting tumor cell infection and lysis. Here, we describe the relative oncolytic efficacies of three rNDV strains differing in IFN antagonism. The rNDV variants with an IFN-sensitive phenotype had parallel therapeutic efficacies in xenotransplanted human fibrosarcoma cells in a nude mouse model and offer great potential as recombinant vectors in therapy of human malignancies.     

Complementation of a Herpes Simplex Virus ICP0 Null Mutant by Varicella-Zoster Virus ORF61p

The herpes simplex virus (HSV) ICP0 protein acts to overcome intrinsic cellular defenses that repress viral α gene expression. In that vein, viruses that have mutations in ICP0''s RING finger or are deleted for the gene are sensitive to interferon, as they fail to direct degradation of promyelocytic leukemia protein (PML), a component of host nuclear domain 10s. While varicella-zoster virus is also insensitive to interferon, ORF61p, its ICP0 ortholog, failed to degrade PML. A recombinant virus with each coding region of the gene for ICP0 replaced with sequences encoding ORF61p was constructed. This virus was compared to an ICP0 deletion mutant and wild-type HSV. The recombinant degraded only Sp100 and not PML and grew to higher titers than its ICP0 null parental virus, but it was sensitive to interferon, like the virus from which it was derived. This analysis permitted us to compare the activities of ICP0 and ORF61p in identical backgrounds and revealed distinct biologic roles for these proteins.Alphaherpesviruses encode orthologs of the herpes simplex virus (HSV) α gene product ICP0. ICP0 is a nuclear phosphoprotein that behaves as a promiscuous activator of viral and cellular genes (7, 11, 28, 29). ICP0 also functions as an E3 ubiquitin ligase to target several host proteins for proteasomal degradation (4, 10, 11, 16, 26). Through this activity, ICP0 promotes degradation of components of nuclear domain 10 (ND10) bodies, including the promyelocytic leukemia protein (PML) and Sp100. These proteins are implicated in silencing of herpesvirus genomes (9, 10, 22, 34). Therefore, ICP0-mediated degradation of ND10 components may disrupt silencing of HSV genes to enable efficient gene expression. This hypothesis provides a plausible mechanistic explanation of how ICP0 induces gene activation.Introduction of DNA encoding the ICP0 orthologs from HSV, bovine herpesvirus, equine herpesvirus, and varicella-zoster virus (VZV) can also affect nuclear structures and proteins (27). In addition, and more specific to this report, ORF61p, the VZV ortholog, activates viral promoters and enhances infectivity of viral DNA like ICP0, the prototype for this gene family (24, 25). However, we have previously demonstrated two key biological differences between the HSV and VZV orthologs. We first showed that unlike ICP0, ORF61p is unable to complement depletion of BAG3, a host cochaperone protein. As a result, VZV is affected by silencing of BAG3 (15), whereas growth of HSV is altered only when ICP0 is not expressed (17). Furthermore, we have shown that while both proteins target components of ND10s, expression of ICP0 results in degradation of both PML and Sp100, whereas ORF61p specifically reduces Sp100 levels (16). These findings suggest that these proteins have evolved separately to provide different functions for virus replication.Virus mutants lacking the ICP0 gene have an increased particle-to-PFU ratio, a substantially lower yield, and decreased levels of α gene expression, in a multiplicity-of-infection (MOI)- and cell-type-dependent manner (2, 4, 8, 33). These mutants are also defective at degrading ND10 components (23). Depletion of PML and Sp100 accelerates virus gene expression and increases plaquing efficiency of HSV ICP0-defective viruses but has no effect on wild-type virus, suggesting that PML and Sp100 are components of an intrinsic anti-HSV defense mechanism that is counteracted by ICP0''s E3 ligase activity (9, 10). Interestingly, ICP0 null viruses are also hypersensitive to interferon (IFN) (26), a property that was suggested to be mediated via PML (3).To directly compare the activities of the two orthologs, we constructed an HSV mutant virus that expresses ORF61p in place of ICP0. The resulting chimeric virus only partially rescues the ICP0 null phenotype. Our studies emphasize the biological differences between ICP0 and ORF61p and shed light on the requirements for PML and Sp100 during infection.     

Mutations in the Stalk Region of the Measles Virus Hemagglutinin Inhibit Syncytium Formation but Not Virus Entry

Measles virus (MV) entry requires at least 2 viral proteins, the hemagglutinin (H) and fusion (F) proteins. We describe the rescue and characterization of a measles virus with a specific mutation in the stalk region of H (I98A) that is able to bind normally to cells but infects at a lower rate than the wild type due to a reduction in fusion triggering. The mutant H protein binds to F more avidly than the parent H protein does, and the corresponding virus is more sensitive to inhibition by fusion-inhibitory peptide. We show that after binding of MV to its receptor, H-F dissociation is required for productive infection.Measles virus (MV) infection requires binding of the hemagglutinin (H) protein to its cognate receptors (9, 20, 21, 29, 41) while the fusion (F) protein triggers membrane lipid mixing and fusion. The H protein is a type II transmembrane homodimeric, disulfide-linked glycoprotein (33). The F protein is a type I membrane glycoprotein that exists as a homotrimeric complex. The protein is cleaved by furin in the trans-Golgi network into a metastable heterodimer with a membrane-spanning F₁ domain and a membrane-distal F₂ domain (16). Expressed alone, neither H nor F leads to membrane fusion, and therefore, both proteins are required and have to interact for productive infection of a target cell (46). There is evidence that these interactions start within the endoplasmic reticulum (34).The H proteins of Paramyxoviridae family members have a globular head with a six-blade β-propellor structure that is responsible for receptor binding (4, 7, 13), a stalk region composed of alpha-helical coiled coils (18, 48) that anchors the complex to the plasma membrane, and a short cytoplasmic domain that can interact with the matrix (M) protein and modulate fusion (2). Given that the F protein does not interact with a receptor on the target cell but undergoes conformational changes to enable membrane fusion, it seems likely that the F protein must interact with the H protein that enables fusion (14, 19, 23, 24, 35, 47). The molecular interactions between the F and H proteins are being increasingly understood (6, 8, 24, 25, 30, 35, 42). Hummel and Bellini have described a mutation in the H glycoprotein where threonine replaced isoleucine 98, which led to loss of fusion in chronically infected cells, but the virus was not rescued (15). Corey and Iorio performed alanine-scanning mutagenesis to determine the role of specific, membrane-proximal residues in the stalk region of the H protein responsible for H-F interactions (6). Substitution of alanine for specific residues in this region altered cell-to-cell fusion and the strength of the H-F interaction in transient-transfection experiments (6). Replacement of isoleucine with alanine at position 98 reduced fusion but did not significantly alter hemadsorption, implying that binding of the mutant H protein to CD46 was not affected (6). More recently, Paal et al. showed that the H protein can tolerate significant additions to its alpha-helical coiled coils without loss of binding or fusion in transient-transfection assays (30). Although these studies confirm the importance of the interactions between the H protein stalk and the metastable F protein for enabling fusion after receptor binding, the exact steps leading to fusion are still unclear. Moreover, studies evaluating H-F interactions were performed with transient protein expression and not in the presence of the actual virus. This is potentially an important shortcoming since the M protein can modulate infection and fusion (1).     

Cell-to-Cell Spread of the RNA Interference Response Suppresses Semliki Forest Virus (SFV) Infection of Mosquito Cell Cultures and Cannot Be Antagonized by SFV

In their vertebrate hosts, arboviruses such as Semliki Forest virus (SFV) (Togaviridae) generally counteract innate defenses and trigger cell death. In contrast, in mosquito cells, following an early phase of efficient virus production, a persistent infection with low levels of virus production is established. Whether arboviruses counteract RNA interference (RNAi), which provides an important antiviral defense system in mosquitoes, is an important question. Here we show that in Aedes albopictus-derived mosquito cells, SFV cannot prevent the establishment of an antiviral RNAi response or prevent the spread of protective antiviral double-stranded RNA/small interfering RNA (siRNA) from cell to cell, which can inhibit the replication of incoming virus. The expression of tombusvirus siRNA-binding protein p19 by SFV strongly enhanced virus spread between cultured cells rather than virus replication in initially infected cells. Our results indicate that the spread of the RNAi signal contributes to limiting virus dissemination.In animals, RNA interference (RNAi) was first described for Caenorhabditis elegans (27). The production or introduction of double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) in cells leads to the degradation of mRNAs containing homologous sequences by sequence-specific cleavage of mRNAs. Central to RNAi is the production of 21- to 26-nucleotide small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) from dsRNA and the assembly of an RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC), followed by the degradation of the target mRNA (23, 84). RNAi is a known antiviral strategy of plants (3, 53) and insects (21, 39, 51). Study of Drosophila melanogaster in particular has given important insights into RNAi responses against pathogenic viruses and viral RNAi inhibitors (31, 54, 83, 86, 91). RNAi is well characterized for Drosophila, and orthologs of antiviral RNAi genes have been found in Aedes and Culex spp. (13, 63).Arboviruses, or arthropod-borne viruses, are RNA viruses mainly of the families Bunyaviridae, Flaviviridae, and Togaviridae. The genus Alphavirus within the family Togaviridae contains several mosquito-borne pathogens: arboviruses such as Chikungunya virus (16) and equine encephalitis viruses (88). Replication of the prototype Sindbis virus and Semliki Forest virus (SFV) is well understood (44, 71, 74, 79). Their genome consists of a positive-stranded RNA with a 5′ cap and a 3′ poly(A) tail. The 5′ two-thirds encodes the nonstructural polyprotein P1234, which is cleaved into four replicase proteins, nsP1 to nsP4 (47, 58, 60). The structural polyprotein is encoded in the 3′ one-third of the genome and cleaved into capsid and glycoproteins after translation from a subgenomic mRNA (79). Cytoplasmic replication complexes are associated with cellular membranes (71). Viruses mature by budding at the plasma membrane (35).In nature, arboviruses are spread by arthropod vectors (predominantly mosquitoes, ticks, flies, and midges) to vertebrate hosts (87). Little is known about how arthropod cells react to arbovirus infection. In mosquito cell cultures, an acute phase with efficient virus production is generally followed by the establishment of a persistent infection with low levels of virus production (9). This is fundamentally different from the cytolytic events following arbovirus interactions with mammalian cells and pathogenic insect viruses with insect cells. Alphaviruses encode host response antagonists for mammalian cells (2, 7, 34, 38).RNAi has been described for mosquitoes (56) and, when induced before infection, antagonizes arboviruses and their replicons (1, 4, 14, 15, 29, 30, 32, 42, 64, 65). RNAi is also functional in various mosquito cell lines (1, 8, 43, 49, 52). In the absence of RNAi, alphavirus and flavivirus replication and/or dissemination is enhanced in both mosquitoes and Drosophila (14, 17, 31, 45, 72). RNAi inhibitors weakly enhance SFV replicon replication in tick and mosquito cells (5, 33), posing the questions of how, when, and where RNAi interferes with alphavirus infection in mosquito cells.Here we use an A. albopictus-derived mosquito cell line to study RNAi responses to SFV. Using reporter-based assays, we demonstrate that SFV cannot avoid or efficiently inhibit the establishment of an RNAi response. We also demonstrate that the RNAi signal can spread between mosquito cells. SFV cannot inhibit cell-to-cell spread of the RNAi signal, and spread of the virus-induced RNAi signal (dsRNA/siRNA) can inhibit the replication of incoming SFV in neighboring cells. Furthermore, we show that SFV expression of a siRNA-binding protein increases levels of virus replication mainly by enhancing virus spread between cells rather than replication in initially infected cells. Taken together, these findings suggest a novel mechanism, cell-to-cell spread of antiviral dsRNA/siRNA, by which RNAi limits SFV dissemination in mosquito cells.     

Probing the Spatial Organization of Measles Virus Fusion Complexes

The spatial organization of metastable paramyxovirus fusion (F) and attachment glycoprotein hetero-oligomers is largely unknown. To further elucidate the organization of functional fusion complexes of measles virus (MeV), an archetype of the paramyxovirus family, we subjected central predictions of alternative docking models to experimental testing using three distinct approaches. Carbohydrate shielding through engineered N-glycans indicates close proximity of a membrane-distal, but not membrane-proximal, section of the MeV attachment (H) protein stalk domain to F. Directed mutagenesis of this section identified residues 111, 114, and 118 as modulators of avidity of glycoprotein interactions and determinants of F triggering. Stalk-length variation through deletion or insertion of HR elements at positions flanking this section demonstrates that the location of the stalk segment containing these residues cannot be altered in functional fusion complexes. In contrast, increasing the distance between the H head domains harboring the receptor binding sites and this section through insertion of structurally rigid α-helical domains with a pitch of up to approximately 75 Å downstream of stalk position 118 partially maintains functionality in transient expression assays and supports efficient growth of recombinant virions. In aggregate, these findings argue against specific protein-protein contacts between the H head and F head domains but instead support a docking model that is characterized by short-range contacts between the prefusion F head and the attachment protein stalk, possibly involving H residues 111, 114, and 118, and extension of the head domain of the attachment protein above prefusion F.Paramyxoviruses infect cells through fusion of the viral envelope with target cell membranes. For all members of the Paramyxovirinae subfamily, this involves the concerted action of two envelope glycoproteins, the fusion (F) and attachment (H, HN, or G, depending on the Paramyxovirinae genus) proteins. Both proteins feature short lumenal tails, a single transmembrane domain, and large ectodomains. The F protein, in type I orientation, forms homotrimers, while homodimers or homotetramers have been suggested as functional units for attachment proteins of different Paramyxovirinae subfamily members (7, 14, 28, 41, 49, 50, 66). For entry, upon receptor binding, the attachment protein is considered to initiate a series of conformational rearrangements in the metastable prefusion F protein (15, 77), which ultimately brings together transmembrane domains and fusion peptides and, thus, donor and target membranes (3, 32, 45, 53, 80).Multiple studies have demonstrated that specific interactions between compatible F and attachment proteins of paramyxovirinae are imperative for the formation of functional fusion complexes (6, 29, 36, 42, 43, 56, 75). However, the molecular nature of these interactions and the spatial organization of functional glycoprotein hetero-oligomers remain largely unknown. Individual ectodomain and partial ectodomain crystal structures have been obtained for different paramyxovirus F (13, 76, 77) and attachment (8, 14, 17, 28, 35, 79) proteins, respectively. For F, a stabilized human parainfluenza virus type 5 (HPIV5) ectodomain that is believed to represent a prefusion conformation folds into a globular head structure that is attached to the transmembrane domains through a helical stalk consisting of the membrane-proximal heptad repeat B (HR-B) domains (77). For the attachment protein, a globular head that harbors the receptor binding sites is considered to be connected to the transmembrane region through extended stalk domains (34, 78). Crystal structures of isolated head domains have been solved for several paramyxovirus attachment proteins, including measles virus (MeV) H, and reveal the six-blade propeller fold typical of sialidase structures (8, 14, 17, 28, 79). However, morbilliviruses recognize proteinaceous receptors (for MeV, the regulator of complement activation [CD46] and/or signaling lymphocytic activation molecule [SLAM], depending on the virus strain) (21, 40, 46, 51, 64, 65). X-ray data do not extend to the stalk domains, but circular dichroism analysis (78) and structure predictions (36, 78) support an α-helical coiled-coil configuration of the stalk.The nature of individual residues that engage in specific intermolecular interactions between glycoproteins of paramyxovirinae prior to refolding has been studied most extensively for the attachment protein. The stalk domains of several paramyxovirus HN proteins have been implicated in mediating specificity for their homotypic F proteins (18, 20, 43, 63, 70, 72). We have found that this extends to MeV and canine distemper virus H and, thus, to paramyxovirinae recognizing proteinaceous receptors (36), supporting the general hypothesis that F-interacting residues may reside in the stalk region of the attachment protein (30, 78).Considerably less information concerning the nature of F microdomains that mediate attachment protein specificity is available. Among the few exceptions are peptides derived from Newcastle disease virus (NDV) and Sendai virus F HR-B domains, which interact with soluble variants of the respective HN proteins in vitro (25, 67). Multiple domains have been suggested to mediate specificity of HPIV2 F for its HN (69). However, a conclusive N-glycan shielding study (43) and structural information (77, 78) argue against direct contacts between NDV F HR-B domains and HN in native glycoprotein complexes. Thus, the role of individual HPIV2 F residues in HN binding is unclear (25, 43).Building on the observation that MeV H is able to engage in productive heterotypic interactions with F proteins derived from some but not all isolates of closely related canine distemper virus, we have recently identified residues in morbillivirus F (MeV F residue 121) and H (H stalk residues 110 to 114) that interdependently contribute to physical MeV glycoprotein interaction and F triggering for fusion (36). While these residues could mediate reciprocal glycoprotein specificity through long-range effects, molecular modeling of the MeV H stalk in an α-helical conformation has posited F residue 121 at the same level above the viral envelope as H residues 110 to 114, making direct contacts structurally conceivable (36). This spatial organization of functional fusion complexes furthermore provides a comprehensive explanation for previous demonstrations of a specific role for attachment protein stalk domains of paramyxovirinae in functional and physical interactions with F (18, 43, 63, 70, 72). However, this “staggered-head” model mandates positioning the globular head of the attachment protein above the prefusion F trimer (36), as opposed to a suggested “parallel-head” alignment of the glycoproteins (31, 47). The latter is mostly based on transmission electron microscopy micrographs of viral particles apparently showing glycoprotein spikes of equal length (33). Unfortunately, these images lack the resolution for an identification of the molecular nature of the spikes (attachment or F protein) or the distinguishing between densely packaged H and F head domains of different heights and laterally aligned head domains. Indeed, a recent single-particle reconstruction based on cryo-electron microscopy images of HPIV5 particles revealed that defined spikes correspond to F in a postfusion conformation, which was interpreted as a product of possible premature F refolding (38). These two-dimensional images of heavy-metal-stained particles did not reveal F spikes in a prefusion conformation. Rather, a dense surface layer was considered to correspond to prefusion glycoprotein hetero-oligomers (38). In addition to further-advanced image reconstructions, biochemical assessment of alternative docking modes is imperative for the elucidation of the organization of functional fusion complexes of paramyxovirinae.In this study, we subjected central predictions of the hypothetical alignment models to experimental analysis. By employing carbohydrate shielding, directed mutagenesis, and variation of the length of the H stalk domain, we examined the proximity of different regions of the H stalk to F, probed a role of individual residues around the previously identified H stalk section from positions 110 to 114 in the formation of functional fusion complexes, tested the effect of varying the length of the H stalk membrane proximal and membrane distal to this section, and explored the general possibility of whether specific contacts between the prefusion F and H head domains are required for F triggering. Experimental data were interpreted in the light of a working model of MeV glycoprotein hetero-oligomers prior to receptor binding.     

Ebola Virus Glycoprotein Counteracts BST-2/Tetherin Restriction in a Sequence-Independent Manner That Does Not Require Tetherin Surface Removal

BST-2/tetherin is an interferon-inducible protein that restricts the release of enveloped viruses from the surface of infected cells by physically linking viral and cellular membranes. It is present at both the cell surface and in a perinuclear region, and viral anti-tetherin factors including HIV-1 Vpu and HIV-2 Env have been shown to decrease the cell surface population. To map the domains of human tetherin necessary for both virus restriction and sensitivity to viral anti-tetherin factors, we constructed a series of tetherin derivatives and assayed their activity. We found that the cytoplasmic tail (CT) and transmembrane (TM) domains of tetherin alone produced its characteristic cellular distribution, while the ectodomain of the protein, which includes a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchor, was sufficient to restrict virus release when presented by the CT/TM regions of a different type II membrane protein. To counteract tetherin restriction and remove it from the cell surface, HIV-1 Vpu required the specific sequence present in the TM domain of human tetherin. In contrast, the HIV-2 Env required only the ectodomain of the protein and was sensitive to a point mutation in this region. Strikingly, the anti-tetherin factor, Ebola virus GP, was able to overcome restriction conferred by both tetherin and a series of functional tetherin derivatives, including a wholly artificial tetherin molecule. Moreover, GP overcame restriction without significantly removing tetherin from the cell surface. These findings suggest that Ebola virus GP uses a novel mechanism to circumvent tetherin restriction.Pathogenic viruses often have evolved mechanisms to neutralize host defenses that act at the cellular level to interfere with the virus life cycle. Such cellular restriction factors have been most extensively characterized for HIV-1 (38) and include the interferon-inducible membrane protein BST-2/HM1.24/CD317/tetherin (28, 40). If unchecked, tetherin blocks the release of newly formed HIV-1 particles from cells by physically tethering them at the cell surface (7, 28, 32, 40). In addition, tetherin has been shown to act against a broad range of enveloped viral particles, including retroviruses, filoviruses, arenaviruses, and herpesviruses (17, 18, 23, 35). In turn, certain viruses that are targeted by tetherin appear to have evolved counteracting activities, and anti-tetherin factors so far identified include HIV-1 Vpu; HIV-2 Env; simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) Nef, Vpu, and Env proteins; Ebola virus GP; and Kaposi''s sarcoma-associated herpesvirus (KSHV) K5 (11, 16, 18, 20, 23, 28, 36, 40, 44, 45).Tetherin is a homodimeric type II integral membrane protein containing an N-terminal cytoplasmic tail (CT), a single-pass transmembrane domain (TM), an ectodomain-containing predicted coiled-coil regions, two glycoslyation sites, three conserved cysteines, and a C-terminal glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchor (2, 19, 31). This unusual topology, with two independent membrane anchors, has led to the suggestion that the retention of virions at the cell surface arises from tetherin''s ability to be inserted simultaneously in both host and viral membranes (28, 32, 41) or, alternatively, that dimers or higher-order complexes of tetherin conferred by the ectodomain mediate this effect (39). Interestingly, an artificial tetherin containing the same structural features as the native protein but constructed from unrelated sequences was able to restrict both HIV-1 and Ebola virus particles (32). This suggests that the viral lipid envelope is the target of tetherin and provides an explanation for tetherin''s broad activity against diverse enveloped viruses.A fraction of tetherin is present at the plasma membrane of cells (9, 14), and it has been proposed that viral anti-tetherin factors function by removing this cell surface fraction (40). This now has been shown to occur in the presence of HIV-1 Vpu (5, 7, 15, 26, 34, 40, 44), HIV-2 Env (5, 20), SIV Env (11), SIV Nef (15), and KSHV K5 (3, 23). In addition, certain anti-tetherin factors also may promote the degradation of tetherin, as has been observed for both HIV-1 Vpu (3, 5, 7, 10, 22, 26, 27) and KSHV K5 (3, 23), although Vpu also appears able to block tetherin restriction in the absence of degradation (8), and no effects on tetherin steady-state levels have been observed in the presence of either the HIV-2 or SIVtan Env (11, 20). Simply keeping tetherin away from the cell surface, or targeting it for degradation, may not be the only mechanism used by anti-tetherin factors, since it also has been reported that Vpu does not affect the levels of surface tetherin or its total cellular levels in certain T-cell lines (27).The interactions between tetherin and viral anti-tetherin factors show evidence of species specificity, suggesting ongoing evolution between viruses and their hosts. HIV-1 Vpu is active against human and chimpanzee tetherin but not other primate tetherins (10, 25, 34, 36, 44, 45), while SIV Nef proteins are active against primate but not human tetherins (16, 36, 44, 45). This suggests that, unlike tetherin restriction, the action of the anti-tetherin factors may involve specific sequence interactions. Indeed, the TM domain has been recognized as a target for HIV-1 Vpu (10, 15, 16, 25, 34), while a single point mutation introduced into the extracellular domain of human tetherin can block its antagonism by the SIVtan Env (11).In the present study, we investigated the roles of the different domains of tetherin in both promoting virus restriction and conferring susceptibility to the anti-tetherin factors encoded by HIV-1, HIV-2, and Ebola virus. We confirmed that tetherin restriction can be conferred by proteins that retain the two distinct membrane anchors, while signals for the cellular localization of the protein reside in the CT/TM domains of the protein. We found that the Vpu protein targets the TM domain of tetherin, while the HIV-2 Env targets the ectodomain of the protein. In contrast, the Ebola virus GP appears to use a non-sequence-specific mechanism to counteract tetherin restriction, since even an artificial tetherin could be successfully overcome by GP expression. Interestingly, Ebola virus GP counteracted tetherin restriction without removing the protein from the cell surface, suggesting that it is possible to overcome this restriction by mechanisms other than blocking tetherin''s cell surface expression.     

The Rab11 Pathway Is Required for Influenza A Virus Budding and Filament Formation

Influenza A virus buds through the apical plasma membrane, forming enveloped virus particles that can take the shape of pleomorphic spheres or vastly elongated filaments. For either type of virion, the factors responsible for separation of viral and cell membranes are not known. We find that cellular Rab11 (a small GTP-binding protein involved in endocytic recycling) and Rab11-family interacting protein 3 ([FIP3] which plays a role in membrane trafficking and regulation of actin dynamics) are both required to support the formation of filamentous virions, while Rab11 is additionally involved in the final budding step of spherical particles. Cells transfected with Rab11 GTP-cycling mutants or depleted of Rab11 or FIP3 content by small interfering RNA treatment lost the ability to form virus filaments. Depletion of Rab11 resulted in up to a 100-fold decrease in titer of spherical virus released from cells. Scanning electron microscopy of Rab11-depleted cells showed high densities of virus particles apparently stalled in the process of budding. Transmission electron microscopy of thin sections confirmed that Rab11 depletion resulted in significant numbers of abnormally formed virus particles that had failed to pinch off from the plasma membrane. Based on these findings, we see a clear role for a Rab11-mediated pathway in influenza virus morphogenesis and budding.Influenza A virus is a highly infectious respiratory pathogen, causing 3 to 5 million severe cases yearly while the recent H1N1 pandemic has spread to over 200 countries and resulted in over 15,000 WHO-confirmed deaths since its emergence in March 2009 (57). Influenza virus particles are enveloped structures that contain nine identified viral polypeptides. The lipid envelope is derived by budding from the apical plasma membrane and contains the viral integral membrane proteins hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) as well as the M2 ion channel. Internally, virus particles contain a matrix protein (M1), small quantities of the NS2/NEP polypeptide, and eight genomic segments of negative-sense RNA that are separately encapsidated into ribonucleoprotein (RNP) particles by the viral nucleoprotein (NP) and tripartite polymerase complex (PB1, PB2, and PA). M1 is thought to form a link between the RNPs and the cytoplasmic tails of the viral membrane proteins though M2 may also play a role (39). The minimal viral protein requirements for budding are disputed; while initial studies suggested that M1 was the main driver of budding (21, 34), more recent work proposes that the glycoproteins HA and NA are responsible (8).Further complicating the analysis of influenza A virus budding is the observation that most strains of the virus form two distinct types of virions: spherical particles approximately 100 nm in diameter and much longer filamentous particles up to 30 μm in length (38). Of the viral proteins, M1 is the primary determinant of particle shape (3, 17) although other virus genes also play a role. It is also likely that host factors are involved in the process as cells with fully differentiated apical and basolateral membranes produce more filaments than nonpolarized cell types (42). While it is tempting to speculate that virus morphology and budding are regulated by the same cellular process, the fact that spherical budding occurs in the absence of an intact actin cytoskeleton while filament formation does not (42, 48) indicates some level of divergence in the mechanisms responsible for spherical and filamentous virion morphogenesis.The means by which viral and cellular membranes are separated are also unclear. Unlike many other enveloped viruses, including retroviruses (19, 36, 52) and herpes simplex virus (12), influenza A virus does not utilize the cellular endosomal sorting complex required for transport (ESCRT) pathway (5, 8). However, recent reports indicate that some viruses, including human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) (32), the hantavirus Andes virus (44), and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) may employ a Rab11-mediated pathway during assembly and/or budding (4, 51). The Rab family of small GTPases is involved in targeting vesicle trafficking, mediating a wide range of downstream processes including endosomal trafficking and membrane fusion/fission events (reviewed in references 53 and 58). Rab11 is involved in trafficking proteins and vesicles between the trans-Golgi network (TGN), recycling endosome, and the plasma membrane (9, 49, 50) as well as playing a role in actin remodeling, cytokinesis, and abscission (27, 41, 55). Apical recycling endosome (ARE) trafficking is of particular interest in the context of viral infection as other negative-sense RNA viruses have been shown to assemble and/or traffic virion components through the ARE prior to final assembly and budding at the plasma membrane (4, 44, 51). Rab11 function is modulated and targeted through interactions with Rab11 family interacting proteins (Rab11-FIPs) that direct it to specific subcellular locations (23, 25, 26) by binding to actin or microtubule-based motor proteins (24, 26, 47). While Rab11-FIPs recognize both isoforms of Rab11 (a and b [Rab11a/b]) through a conserved amphipathic α-helical motif, they differ in their ability to bind either the GTP-bound form of Rab11 (FIP1, FIP3, FIP4, and Rip11) or both the GTP and GDP-bound forms (FIP2) (23, 30). FIP1 and FIP2 have been implicated in RSV budding (4, 51) while FIP4 is important for trafficking of HCMV components (32). FIP3 has not previously been linked with virus budding but plays an important role in both cell motility and cytokinesis, regulating actin dynamics and endosomal membrane trafficking (29, 55).In light of the normal cellular functions of Rab11 and its effectors and of their reported involvement in the budding of other viruses, we examined the role of this cellular pathway in influenza virus budding. We find that Rab11-FIP3 is essential for filamentous but not spherical virion formation while Rab11 is required for both forms of virus budding.